AKA Rick

In my opinion, leaving a Neutral isn't an option, it's either you're satisfied with a Positive or you're disgruntled with a Negative in this case. All neutral does is create more grey haziness to the piece and the seller. Neutrals has little to no impact on the seller nor the community of buyers looking for fair warnings. At $300+ you paid, it seems you're clearly aren't happy about the purchase, relegating it to a future donation, you might want to contact the seller to see if you can get a refund. Your request and the basis of that is reasonable. You seem very honorable and forthright as a person to the point of eating the costs as a lesson learned. I understand why you're wavering on neutral or negative based on the kindness of your demeanor. I don't think you're doing the seller any favors nor the community of future buyers by leaving a neutral. Either have your voice heard with a Negative, or chalk it up as a bad experience and do nothing, but first give the seller the opportunity to right size the transaction. The seller might be able to provide a partial refund so you don't feel gauged on the price, and that may then warrant Positive feedback.

That's under 7 copies per state in the USA and the rest of the world gets none. That's how my calculations justify your ton So, you are saying only 7 people in each state, and no collectors outside of the USA, would want a 9.8 copy? The demand far exceeds that. I have one of NY State's copies. This makes a strong case for why some comic book collectors and investors should be moving out of graded comics and into original artwork (not commissions or sketch covers, but the published artwork). We've all seen those population reports explode and market values waiver with the influx of high/higher graded books. I wonder where the original art for Batman Adventures #12 is whether the cover or interiors? I know there's some of Harley Quinn artwork by Terry Dodson from one of the early series floating around here and there, and various Harley renderings in recent appearances in her own title or other DC books. They're (original published artwork) all one of a kind, the supreme and ultimate bragging rights to cornering the market and having true exclusivity!

To that point of Miles being from the Ultimate Universe and being less known... so was "Black" Nick Fury which Bryan Hitch created for The Ultimates (Ultimate Universe's Avengers) with photo referencing the character to resemble Samuel L. Jackson (before he was even cast for the movie or the film was in development). As opposed to the "White" Nick Fury portrayed by David Hasseloff years before which failed. However, Nick Fury is a minor character. But, Samuel L. Jackson is a big name actor, so that's where his starpower also makes it work. With other trans-racial switches in movies like "The Kingpin" in "Daredevil" and "Johnny Storm / Human Torch" in the forthcoming "Fantastic Four" it seemed to make a whole lot less sense since in the comic book mythology, those characters were always "White", not ambiguous as an Alien nor identities obscured by masks, so where Marvel and the movie makers were maybe trying to be both PC and innovators, it was/is, to fans, changing tradition. I think the same thing is probably felt about Spider-Man in that he's best known as Peter Parker, and Peter Parker is a young "White" guy. I'm sort of surprised there's not more backlash about the casting of a "Brit" as opposed to an "All American Boy" using an American actor with a face that resembles in part the comic book image of Peter Parker. I think with Spider-Man, most fans know him as Peter, not Miles. Just as most fans know Green Lantern as Hal Jordan; Thor as Donald Blake; Captain America as Steve Rogers; 'tho all have been other mortals anointed with the super powers and namesake. So, it's less about race, more about familiarity.

Does this have any impact on the speculation for Miles Morales as the matinee Spider-Man in the movies that may in part be why prices are being driven up? http://hollywoodlife.com/2015/06/19/spider-man-white-straight-sony-emails-mandatory-traits/ Peter Parker has two very important prerequisites — according to newly released emails from the infamous Sony hack. New leaked corporate messages appear to show that execs from the company made it a mandatory requirement that Spider-Man be white and straight. A lot of jaw-dropping bombshells came out of all those leaked Sony emails in 2014. The latest revelation? A licensing agreement between Sony Pictures Entertainment and Marvel Entertainment was allegedly disclosed in a major document leak by the website Wikileaks, and it reveals some pretty harsh rules for Peter Parker and his beloved, arachnid alter ego, Spider-Man. Yep, it includes requirements for his race and sexual orientation. Read on for all the shocking details! According to the agreement, it is “mandatory” that Spider-Man must be: male; does not torture; does not kill in defense of self or others; does not use foul language beyond PG-13; dose not smoke tobacco; does not sell/distribute illegal drugs; does not abuse alcohol; does not have sex before the age of 16; does not have sex with anyone below the age of 16; and is not a homosexual.” There are also “traits” that Peter Parker must “conform” to. Those “traits” include: his full name is Peter Benjamin Parker; he is Caucasian and heterosexual; his parents become absent from his life during his childhood; from the time his parents become absent he is raised by Aunt May and Uncle Ben in New York City; he gains his powers while attending either middle school or college; he gains his powers from being bitten by a spider; he designs his first red and blue costume; the black costume is a symbiote and not designed by him; he is raised in a middle class household in Queens, New York; he attends or attended high school in Queens, New York; and he attends or attended college in New York City. Aside from this shortened roster, the most specific and close-minded qualifications are obviously that the superhero is “not a homosexual and Caucasian.” Wow — why put Spidey in a box, Sony? The most ironic part of all this? The contract between Marvel and Sony began in September 2011, just months after a black-Latino Spider-Man was first introduced to the comic book world. Next, diehard fans of the saga actually started a social media campaign to get black actor Donald Glover, 31, cast in the last Spider-Man flicks — which ended up starring Andrew Garfield, 31. Donald, who lent his voice as Miles Morales in the Disney cartoon, Spider-Man: Web Warriors, was loved so much by fans of the series that they even created this hashtag: #donald4spiderman. Well, now fans know why their voices were unheard. #SMH. HollywoodLifers — what do YOU think? Should there be “mandatory traits” to be Spider-Man? Sound off below in the comments! http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=57761

The last sold (completed auctions) sold for under $20 where most are with high Buy It Now non-auctions, so I'm guessing the valuation is around that $15-25 price range. Always look at the completed/sold vs the offered prices (if it's still available at a posted price, it usually means it's overpriced)

I heard that some people circumvent artist's forced personalization by using a name attached to the book, either a characters name (maybe as depicted in the artwork) or the writer of the book, so it looks somewhat more relevant.

Do you think the personalization reduces the value? For me personally, it's a deal breaker to have such a large dedication on the page, even if it were my own name.

Based upon all of the questionable qualities of the piece, personally, I'd be at peace not owning a piece like this at any price over what I'd be comfortable paying, and unfortunately, my comfort zone would be sub-par to what others would probably risk paying. I'm one of those finicky collectors who don't like "inks over bluelines" nor "stats" and even am not a huge fan of today's modern art with weak pencils only (embellished by digitial inks or post-production coloring). So, its just more my opinion to what it's worth to me. There's so much great artwork available for Avengers and by John Buscema, that I'd personally just look at this, admire it from afar and save my money for another piece.

I think this is similar to today's digital artists who sell digital prints that are 1/1 in that it's not a piece for everyone and the nature of the format turns many collectors off in terms of valuation. But if this piece is indeed legitimate, not some home made counterfeit recreation posing as something used in production, and was the actual production piece used to publish the comic book, then it's fairly significant and I can see where some collectors may drool over it and pay a premium for its historical significance regardless of original pencil and ink vs stats. I'm always a bit weary on artwork with stats, or color guides or anything that looks like it could have been created / re-created outside of the realm of legitimacy that looks outside the standard or conventional norm. I wonder if the stats used are simply a montage of previously used/published figure artwork? Or are the originals simple separate (and if so, are they now non-existent or can be sourced and credited to being part of other publication covers or pages)?

I don't consider Capullo, yet to rival Jim Lee in terms of art market value pricing, but different strokes for different folks. Capullo may be the ultimate businessman and marketing genius by limiting the supply and controlling the inventory and pricing it to the level he wants to cultivate the ongoing values at. Personally, I'd think interiors should be in the $500 range and covers in the $2-5k range and $8-12k if a truly remarkable cover. But that's just my opinion.

So, for his art, from what it sounds like the originals are in 2 versions. Pencils Only Inks over Bluelined Pencils ?

I think generally speaking I correlate "under-perform" with "under-valued" so with that my answer or opinions rather, would be: Carmine Infantino is under-appreciated, especially his 1980's super hero artwork EC Comics art and artists is commanding lower values than I'd think vintage art of that era and importance should or could be worth. Gil Kane is slowly rising, and he along with Infantino I feel should be gaining demand momentum of many collectors are getting out priced to afford peers of that ear like Neal Adams, Jack Kirby, John Romita, John Buscema and Steve Ditko. Bill Ward, although his art tends to be on the erotic and risque side, I feel his body of work is solid, and prices very reasonable and affordable for all. George Perez seems to be seen a a lower tier to John Byrne of that era, and with that the prices seem disproportionate and I feel are under performing to their potential. Marshall Rogers - aside from his work on Detective Comics Batman, most of his material doesn't command much attention nor pricing/value. His style is unique and I'd think it's only a matter of time it's more fully recognized by the masses. Modern Day Artists of Today - Although I think to a degree art is like fine wine and a lot of patience needs to be instilled in the waiting game of allowing the fan base to mature and the body of work to appreciate and be appreciated. I think art by Ed Benes, Mark Bagley, Brett Booth, John Cassaday, Mike Choi, Ian Churchill, Mike Deodato, Ale Garza, Josh Howard, Dan Jurgens, Greg Land, Salvador Larocca, Ed McGuiness, Steve McNiven, Carlos Pacheco, Philip Tan and a few others have the potential to go up in value where there's good buying opportunities today at auctions to pick up pieces that under-perform. I do think some of the pop culture subject matter art for TV shows and Movies like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Star Wars and other licensed properties have been under performing, but mainly because a lot of the art is rendered by lesser known named artists.

I think X-Men Annual #14 has bigger upside with today's current pricing of anywhere from $2 to $10 (check eBay completed/sold auctions) since it is notable by both Arthur Adams artwork and Gambit's 1st albeit cameo, Appearance. Where an Uncanny X-Men #266 will cost about $40. So, from an investor / investing standpoint, the odds of the X-Men Annual #14 going up by a bigger %, let's say 300% or more from $2-10 up to $6-30, is more probable than Uncanny X-Men #266 going up by 300% from $40 to $120, plus if you have disposable cash, you can horde a lot more X-Men Annual #14's and find them in the bargain bins still.

Are the 2nd printings of 361 and 362 and the 1st printing of 363 worth getting graded? I bought them new and never read them so speculate a 9.6 to 9.8 condition.

I know I've heard that there's a few collectors who have bought a certain artist's (mainly new not yet established artists who are recognized by not widely collected) work that want to see the prices maintained but sometimes have little interest pieces that come to market bid them up to either cost average their collection of that artist, blending in the cheap with the expensive or do bid on pieces in hopes it increases the perceived values of their own pieces all while not bidding without the intent of paying if they win, but hoping they do get outbid and the prices climb.

What's the opinion on the estimated value of artwork from The Walking Dead #53 featuring the 1st appearance of Abraham, Rosita and Eugene ? http://www.comiclink.com/auctions/item.asp?back=%2Fsearch_adv_art.asp%3Fall%3Dy%26CATEGORIES%3D-1%26Artist1%3DCHARLIE%2520ADLARD%26PRICEF%3D%26PRICET%3D%26SORT%3DCATEG%26where_auctione%3Dy%26where_auctions%3Dy%23Item_1037615&id=1037615 Do you think with Abraham dead in the comics (yet alive, for now on the TV show) has any impact on the value, as he once was a key character in the comics, but at least Rosita and Eugene are still alive (for now) in the comic series.

It is a double edged sword, there will be some cases where pieces will be brought to your attention if not brought specifically to market just for you, especially something as niche as ROM which isn't so mainstream nor popular enough to in most cases garner strong attention and rate hikes. I'd hope the marketplace would be kind to collectors like you other than a few of the key pieces by specific artists or the X-Men appearance issues that crosses over into what a lot of others collects. But, then again, all it takes is 2 for a bidding war, and ROM isn't so undesirable so to speak and isn't without fans (my brother loved the series growing up), and the problem is, if you're helping flush out the material and putting the spotlight on 'em, others attentions may be drawn where otherwise you could have navigated the marketplace with greater stealth in having more exclusive opportunities. Similarly, just like being a public gallery type vs a black hole collector, there's a lot of pros and cons to showing your cards. I know a lot of collectors who have key pieces that don't want their identities nor possessions revealed. The public gallery types argue, it's something to share (not necessarily brag about boastfully as the intent of telling) and even let it be known to attract potential pie in the sky sales/trade offers from other collectors. Whereas the black hole collectors just want to remain discreet in what they are hunting for and what they possess, assuming that "nothing to gain, everything to lose" perspective of either drawing attention to what they want or what they own (from the ownership perspective, to them it's like walking down the street wearing a Rolex with your sleeves rolled up or covered, fearing possible theft). I think there's a fine balance between the two schools. Personally in auction situations, if a friend of mine is going after a piece I'm mildly interested in, I'd like to know, so I can back off the bidding and abstain to let 'em acquire it. I often confer with friends during auctions to ensure we're not bidding against each other out of courtesy and camaraderie. If there's a piece we both want, we'll confer on who wants it most then it'll be decided in advance who's bidding and who's sitting on the sidelines.

His resume is maybe missing one element of being a part of a creative team on a regular mainstream book much like Jim Lee on "Hush" for Batman, Neal Adams run on Green lantern/Green Arrow, John Byrne on Chris Claremont's Uncanny X-Men, George Perez's New Teen Titans, etc. - something to be known for as a storyteller more than as a pin-up artist. His work on Danger Girl has a cult like following and was a great adventure, but not mainstream popular, 'tho, I thought had the makings of something great. I thought I heard he was at one time going to work a monthly on Spider-Man with I think a legendary writer like Loeb. I think Spiider-Man is the perfect title for him to work on. He's sort of like Adam Hughes, doing lots of covers, but remains one of the main reasons why some books sell.

If J Scott Campbell is not in The Top 10 of artists currently producing published work in comics, I wonder who is better than him ?

What do the 2nd printings and 3rd printings look like? Variant covers with new artwork?

Theoretically, if each page is 1/1, one of a kind... outside of unique demand driven by a 1st appearance of a character or a really great storyline that resonates with the fans, isn't each page equally as scarce (of course driven by supply and demand in what is available at market and what's not)? So, buying some of the current pages of issue #100+ has the same odds of future value as early issues in the lower numbers? (Aside from the Tony Moore factor of the limited number of issues he illustrated) I do like the way the new issues are on 2 pieces, the pencils separate from the inks, so the art process is shown on full size 11" x 17"

Are any of the "The Death of Wolverine" Issues doing well? Specific Variants such as the Ed McGuiness "Mortal" Variant for #1 or the Greg Land "Puzzle Cover" for Issues, 1, 2 3, and 4 that link together which I think was exclusive to "Hastings"?

About time. I stockpiled those years ago when I was a dealer. I think it's a really cool "1st appearance". It's nice to see an editorial team pay attention to details from the past when creating new stories/characters. (thumbs u It's sort of like how in the 1990's those 1960's Marvel "Prototype" character books started to become notable. I think it's INCREDIBLE HULK #184 in the "Letter's Column" there's a reprinted panel appearance of Wolverine and had fan editorial reaction to the character. At home point some were speculating on that book to be worth something other than the common book that it was. If people are interested and want something, creating demand, the supply starts to diminish and values go up, regardless of if people believe the hype is artificial or debatable. I think this makes for a nice addition to any X-23 "fan's" collection, but it's a "cameo" / "mention" at best and not a visual 1st appearance of the developed character. Much like when Sue Storm Richards was pregnant... was that the 1st Appearance of Franklin?

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, just make sure you sell them before he dies. Villain books never hold up their movie hype once the villain is done. CBT, I really appreciate the input. I really enjoy the issue. I am not sure what to do with them, but I do enjoy staring at them every other week Decisions, Decisions, Decisions... R_H Regardless of any movie hype, this was a notable book back in the 1980's and is popular today and will remain relevant in the future. I'm not a fan of the inflation due to film exposure, personally. I feel it's short lived in the supply and demand chain. I do think this book is awesome because the artwork is by Jim Starlin and it's a "1st Appearance" book of some major and minor characters. I'd keep the 9.8 and sell the rest based on the hype, starting with the lowest grade and releasing them slowly not to flood the market. Then use the money towards other books you want or keep the cash, so long as you remain profitable in selling them, don't worry about if the books continue to rise, just be happy you're pulling profits off the table and moving that money toward other things you may want or need.

What is with "Edge of Spider-Verse #2 ?" Is that the 1st Appearance of "Gwen Stacy as "Spider-Woman" Is this more of a "What If?" character and story or some parallel universe that ultimately will mean nothing and soon to be forgotten, or is this a legitimate character? I saw the Greg Land variant cover (1:25) go from $25 up to $40 and now lurking around $50 in the past week... Here's what I dug up on the internet about it: http://superiorspidertalk.com/spidiversity-the-spectacular-rise-of-spider-gwen/ Spidiversity: The Spectacular Rise of Spider-Gwen By Alex Nader · On September 29, 2014 Spidiversity is an ongoing feature that explores a diverse range of issues in Spider-Man media, including gender, race, sexual orientation, and disability. It is published on the second Wednesday of every month by Jaleh Najafali and the fourth Monday of the month by Alex Nader. The upcoming “Spider-Verse” event hasn’t technically started. Well, in the larger sense it has. It’s in the preliminary phases, but it has already proven to be an exciting time to be a Spider-Fan! Presently, the popular mobile game “Spider-Man Unlimited” features a fairly hasty storyline involving the recruitment of multiple Spider-Men to face the Sinister Six, “Ultimate Spider-Man: Web Warriors” has an upcoming arc featuring a multiverse of Spider-Men, and Doctor Octopus is gathering a team of Spider-Men to fight the mysterious assassins intent on murdering Spider-Men and -Women throughout the multiverse. The multimedia reign of “Spider-Verse” has only started, but its most interesting development has arrived with Gwen Stacy, Spider-Woman. Last Wednesday, Gwen Stacy: Spider-Woman (affectionately dubbed “Spider-Gwen” by fans) debuted in Edge of Spider-Verse #2, by Jason Latour and Robbi Rodriguez. The issue featured Gwen, well into her crimefighting career and facing a disturbing rendition of The Rhino. The comic told a compelling, tightly-focused story with incredible art by Rodriguez. It was self-contained with the potential for future utilization of the character (as solicited). The excitement over this new version of Gwen Stacy began several months ago, when the Edge of Spider-Verse solicits broke. The Edge of Spider-Verse mini-series features the return of fan-favorite Spider-Man Noir, Spider-Gwen, and three upcoming renditions of Spider-Man (a mechanically inclined scientist, a horror-inspired take, and a mechanized robot). While all five “What-ifs?” are intriguing diversions from the Spider-Man mythos, Gwen’s issue was able to recast the perennially distressed character into a position of power and prominence within Marvel Comics. Gwen Stacy: Spider-Woman is an incredibly potent character, representing the dormant. More than that, she is an indicator of the incredible potential of taking risks and diversifying the comic book audience. Gwen’s newfound popularity is the result of her fantastic design and characterization, and the feasibility of the character’s continued success has only increased following her first appearance. The Design Rodriguez’s design is clean. It runs counter to many current costume designs, simplifying rather than making complex. The complex style of costume—tactical and pseudo-realistic—has become fairly popular in recent years, a choice I would likely attribute to the costume styles in the X-Men and Batman (Nolan) films. It isn’t unnecessarily busy like Silk’s costume or overly-sexual like Spider-Woman’s (Jessica Drew). Gwen’s costume is reminiscent of Spider-Man’s original symbiote costume—contrasting colors and clever use of blacks combine with the costume’s plausibility—it looks like a costume that a high-school student could make! And it has already been replicated by fans several times, with great success and admiration by Marvel’s artists. Art has been created by countless fans replicating the design and attaching it to their own ideas. Gwen’s costume also, perhaps most importantly, does not seek to sexualize the character. At least, not moreso than Spider-Man’s costume (or the inevitably tight spandex inherent to the genre). Place alongside the recent controversy around Milo Manara’s Spider-Woman art, Rodriguez’s design for Gwen Stacy fits the mood of the story alongside the character. The costume is a fresh step in character design, evoking past designs and creating something new. Beyond that, the characters in the comic (and Gwen’s civilian attire) looked like clothing that teenagers wear. This contrasts heavily with the shocking (to me) continued usage of midriff-showing costumes and clothing, and indicates that the designers are at least on some level in touch with their audience and subject. And that is perhaps the most important aspect of the comic’s popularity! The Characterization So, Gwen’s costume looks great. But what does that mean if the comic didn’t follow suit? Gwen’s introduction occurs months into her Spider-Woman career. A brief recap page highlights her early superhero career, featuring many parallels to (our) Peter Parker’s Spider-History, including the death of (her universe’s) Peter Parker in a twist on the Lizard storyline. Like any good Spider-Man story, the hero is tortured. Spider-Man’s a popular hero, but has no friends at school; Gwen is Spider-Woman, which creates turmoil at home with her policeman father (thankfully not played or drawn as Denis Leary). She is the drummer of Mary Jane’s rock band (“The Mary Janes,” cleverly playing on the characters’ relationships with audiences through their history) and an inheritor of the old “Parker Luck,” or “Stacy Luck” as it were. Latour and Rodriguez were able to take the important aspects of the Spider-Man character and merge them with Gwen Stacy’s vital characterization, creating a character both familiar and new. Gwen Stacy honors both characters while examining the possibilities of a universe where one of its biggest heroes is a woman. This is the type of universe that many readers are extremely eager to enjoy; hopefully we will get the opportunity for more! The Potential This revitalized version of Gwen Stacy has a huge amount of potential for continued success in Marvel. The overwhelming response has only continued following the publication of Edge of Spider-Verse #2. The comic has sold out, and reviews have been very positive. As I wrote earlier, she is set to appear later in the “Spider-Verse” event. Beyond Spider-Verse, however, will the character continue? There is definitely demand—just yesterday Spider-Architect Dan Slott tweeted his support for the continuation of the character.