catch21

all 9.8s

NYCC Submission Modern Fast Track Dropped off Saturday 10/14 Schedule for Grading 10/19 Grading/Encapsulation/Imaging 10/23 Grading/Quality Control 10/27 Shipped 10/27

NYCC Submission Modern Fast Track Dropped off Saturday 10/14 Schedule for Grading 10/19 Grading/Encapsulation/Imaging 10/23 Grading/Quality Control 10/27

NYCC Submission Modern Fast Track Dropped off Saturday 10/14 Schedule for Grading 10/19 Grading/Encapsulation/Imaging 10/23

NYCC Submission Modern Fast Track Dropped off Saturday 10/14 Schedule for Grading 10/19

Damn, I was late; it closed at 7,700. Thats a bargain.

Submitted books drop off at SDCC on Sunday Fast Track Modern Received: 7/28/23 Scheduled for Grading: 7/28/23

Which version? There are two A colored cover version that was sold at the Skybound booth and a black and white version given at the panel.

Before you do look at Bagley Remarques on UF4

"You'll see all of it" was the quote. That's it. We don't know what was asked before. The rest that writer is adding more than what was said. Avi only talked about Spider-woman.

What you put in bold is not her quote. That's the writer's assumption to click bait.

That's what happened with on Riri IIM 7 flipped to IIM 9, Jessica Cruz GL 25 flipped to JL 31, Now Daimen on the regular with 655 and 656.

Because learning the difference ahead of the market your roi can be higher in most cases,

Oh yeah that metal body at the end who speaks is Stryfe not Cable?

All you are doing is repeating yourself without backing up with resources that show someone in the shadows and body count as full appearance in the grading community. For example, Doomsday had multiple appearances with body parts only but those appearances didn't count as full. Hope pym appearance was just a leg soeaking and it didn't count as a full.

Agreed, like Hulk 180, Amazing 299 , Avengers 195, Invincible Iron Man 7, New mutants 86, 656 is a last page reveal teasar. This should be 2nd appearance in cameo. For grading companies, Although it is an appearance, shadows of the character being in background and body parts do not count towards a full appearance. The Scott Lang test is the bare minimum to qualify for full. Outside of the comic world, yes you would be correct. there would be no "1st appearance in cameo". However,remember we are using how CGC, the grading comic book world normally determines the type of 1st appearance is important. Plus when you read 657, Batman litterally Introduces Daimen name for the 1st time with the name being in bold and explains his origin to the reader. 657 should be 1st appearance in full.

Wouldn't a better comparison be Batman 655 vs 656 vs 657? The demand for deadpool is way higher.

Sorry what's special about this book?

Plenty of Buy it now of 655 9.8 on the market. No 656 and 657 buy it now on the market.

My bad, I should have been specific. The terminology I am using is how graded copies label. The terminalogy you used is correct for nongraded books and how collectors defined books prior to the graded companies. For graded companies we can't change their terminology because too many books have been graded using the 4 categories listed above According to the graded companies, you can't label a book "1st full appearance" without a previous book"1st cameo appearance". A charactar with first full appearance without a 1st appearance cameo is labeled "1st appearance". Gambit though seems like a mix-up in terminology with old school collectors, new collectors and graded companies with how X-men annual 10 and Uncanny 266 should be labeled due to a publish mix up vs continuity. If I were to guess, in the beginning of CGC they were using the collectors terminology but later switched to the 4 categories when new collectors discovered characters were published prior. You are right. We have too many ways how appearances are defined. It is confusing.

You are talking to someone who does not want to learn comic book terminology. That's why OP is confused. There are 4 categories: Predates=Any ad or promotion, or preview(not orignal art or taken from the original book) 1st appearance= Use the Scott Lang test. 3 panels or more where you can view the characters face. It is full appearance that has NO 1st cameo appearance published. It can be a Preview with original art only published in the preview. 1st appearance in Cameo= 2 face panels or less. The panels can have unlimited amount body parts. 1st Full Appearance =needs a 1st appearance in cameo published before has 3 panels or more where you can view the characters face. Due to publishing decisions unknown to Chris Claremont.There are outliers to these categories like Gambit and Rogue that were published out of continuity. Are there books mislabeled? Yup, a lot. Unfortutantly, the majority market likes to own the books and trust wikis than to check by reading what's inside the issue and not challenge mistakes. If it is caught early enough, it can be fixed. Some can't like Killer croc, Magik, Jason Todd, and James Rhodes. Everything you said is spot on.

Most people on the market do not know what is inside the book.

Yeah 656 has less panels than 655.

Currently there are less copies of 656 in the census compared to each 1:10 variant and regular of 655. However, 655 sold copies sell for more.

Half right, asm 299 1st appearance in cameo Hulk 180 1st appearance in cameo. 655 is Daimen 1st appearance in cameo. Can't say cameo alone. Yeah 657 is key book. 657 is something I can see in a movie.