500Club

Yup. This is an ultimate truth, no matter how passionate people's individual views are. (thumbs u

Yeah, I'd agree with that. It's a supply side skew that plays a role in MOS 17/18 as well. There are so many variables. It makes it pretty much impossible to develop a formulaic approach to these things.

Yup. As worthless as a discussion may be to some folks, comments like that are worth less than nothing. Like I said to the doofus who wanted to control the parameters of the thread, feel free to contribute something of worth.

I would consider that a 1st appearance, but you are going to receive all kinds of votes on this. I'd lean to yes as well, but, sooner or later, there'll be an example to make us gnash our teeth. I'm envisioning a throw away background image like the Spider-Gwen cosplayers in Ms Marvel 14. The market 'votes' in strange ways. JO is valued as a full first; XMen Ann 14 as a cameo.

First appearance debate. Examples discussed. No new hot books. Cap 275 sale by divad at a fairly impressive price.

And there's no need to assume there's some sort of "messup" involved. I feel this needs to be said again: creators don't care about the aftermarket. Their only concern is "is this a good story, yes/no, and will it sell copies, yes/no?" I doubt the scheduling of Gambit's appearances even entered Claremont's...or anyone's...mind. He and the Simonsons plotted out DOFP, included Gambit because the story takes place after the story in 265-267, and that was that. No error, no screwup. Nothing "came out too early", there was no "mixup at the distributor", etc. This isn't the first time such an "out of chronology" story has happened...in fact, it happened all the time ("The events in this story take place BEFORE/AFTER thus and such")...it just happened that THIS time involved the debut of one of the more popular characters created in the time period. I have to wonder why we were told to pull them off the shelves, then. Were you told anything more? Because that IS odd. It's very tough for these books to end up shipping early by mistake, because the print and distribution schedule is pretty tight. That's doubly true for this book, which was part of a sequential story across the Annuals of several titles. I don't recall anything at the time about the parts of DoFP shipping out of order.

No. But thanks for asking. Or, better yet, why don't YOU step up and contribute what you feel is appropriate. I just did. COPPER COMICS THAT ARE HEATING UP ON EBAY. Maybe the thread heading isn't clear enough for you. You contributed nothing.

No. But thanks for asking. Or, better yet, why don't YOU step up and contribute what you feel is appropriate.

My best guess is that Marvel hashed out a rough plan for releases 6-12 months ahead, with the releases in proper order. Given the way he was scattergunning concepts and subplots at the time, Claremont probably got sidetracked on a storyline, and ended up having Gambit appear in UXM 2-3 months later than the original blueprint.

Although some of these discussions get emotional and heated due to beliefs, opinions and experience, for the most part there are great discussions about comic book history (assumed or otherwise). I wouldn't say because someone posted an extensive amount of research this means you then cut everyone else off from providing their opinion on a topic. So let a good conversation take place. But better to read and listen to everyone's contributions, versus cutting contributors off from sharing their thoughts. Then at least all those sources of information helps build a more thorough picture. Just a suggestion. I agree. Let the discussions flow. They often spin off into useful side topics. They also allow everyone a chance to chime in on their views on the topic at hand. (thumbs u

Interesting website for sure. Not much on the possible shipping error, though. Yeah, they also have the same challenge of determining why Marvel would publish a crossover story out of order, other than noting 'different release dates'. But I didn't post that to prove anything. If we are going to discuss an interesting character like Gambit, it's also fun to happen across a site like that. We all know there are fanatics for most of these characters. But that site definitely shows a level of fan love for sure. It worked. I went in there thinking they had some info on the release dates, and ended up bookmarking the site to read later.

It came out in stores/on the newstand first. Thus, the first time the public saw Gambit...right? Correct - due to a print scheduling error. X-Men 266 ' s story comes first before X-Men Annual 14. A) You missed RMAs rather compelling argument that the book came out when it was supposed to. It even had the footnote referencing X-Men 265-267, which would have been placed IN PRODUCTION. Either Marvel knew the Annual was coming out first, or someone at Marvel had a crystal ball and foresaw a 'shipping error'. B) The above is moot. The Annual came out first. It would be a quest in error to try and pitch UXM 266 was published first. Reality says otherwise. But when you follow the story flow, UXM 266 comes before X-Men Annual 14. There is no debating that either. Even that early conversation between Ororo and Gambit in Annual 14 is talking about their meeting in UXM 266. Gambit even wishes she would go back to a speechless child - but in jest. Is there really any debate over the flow of the story? None at all. Story flow and release dates are flip flopped. BUT, it's been seen before, with ASM 252, SW 8. I suspect Marvel realized they were locked into a release schedule with the sequential Annuals, and put the footnote in, though. On an unrelated note, as an 11 year old newsstand buyer, those footnotes were like a sniff of highly addictive comic book crack.

Interesting website for sure. Not much on the possible shipping error, though.

It came out in stores/on the newstand first. Thus, the first time the public saw Gambit...right? Correct - due to a print scheduling error. X-Men 266 ' s story comes first before X-Men Annual 14. A) You missed RMAs rather compelling argument that the book came out when it was supposed to. It even had the footnote referencing X-Men 265-267, which would have been placed IN PRODUCTION. Either Marvel knew the Annual was coming out first, or someone at Marvel had a crystal ball and foresaw a 'shipping error'. B) The above is moot. The Annual came out first. Edit: now that I think about A, I'm not as sure, as Marvel footnotes were so common back then...

Cap 359/360.

Add X-Factor 24 to this list. seriously, just read x factor 23 again last night, and archangel is in more than one panel, he does stuff, and he talks. You see most if not all of his body. I think it the most aggressive use of the "If the 1st app has him on one page only and the second app has him in the story and the cover then its the real 1st appearance rule." Yeah, that's another example of a pretty significant 'cameo'. How is his appearance in 23 a cameo based on what the board member describes about the issue? I thought I'd laid the sarcasm on pretty thick... It looks pretty damn close to a full appearance to me.

Add X-Factor 24 to this list. seriously, just read x factor 23 again last night, and archangel is in more than one panel, he does stuff, and he talks. You see most if not all of his body. I think it the most aggressive use of the "If the 1st app has him on one page only and the second app has him in the story and the cover then its the real 1st appearance rule." Yeah, that's another example of a pretty significant 'cameo'.

Should I regard all of your posts in that light, too? Have we become so cynical that we must assume that everybody always has an agenda, all the time? Yes Yes. i have an agenda too, creating a universally accepted definition of first appearance. There already is one. First appearance: the first time a character appears in a comic book story. Done. Well done! That's that! Now we can move on to other matters.

How big is this "growing segment"? How do you know it is growing, rather than shrinking? Where did this segment start? How did it start? Of whom is it comprised? We have a closeted view here on the boards. A couple of vocal tubthumpers can subconsciously make it seem the view is more prevalent than it is. In the larger world, we don't get asked for these books at shows. No Previews requests. No Marvel Age requests. Nothing. And nothing on display at other booths, either. In the LCSs, nothing... No retailers I talk to mention these books as being asked for or selling.

Should I regard all of your posts in that light, too? Have we become so cynical that we must assume that everybody always has an agenda, all the time? I think it says something about how Ween himself is viewing the issue.

Let's dispense with, once and for all, the idea that Overstreet is some sort of authority that speaks for the market and is always factually sound. Despite your list of definitions, Overstreet itself is inconsistent with the application, as the history of listings for X-Men 266/Ann 14 will show. You can have your literal definition of a first appearance being a first printed image. I, and the great majority of responders, will hold with the bastardized meaning. The literal meaning hasn't been in use in the hobby for a long time, if ever.

Usually, in the long run, the market susses out the right book. We'll see how X-Men 266/Ann 14 plays out.

Who are you talking to? The folks who think 'first appearance' is carved in stone as the literal meaning, and not the way it has become used in the comic collecting lexicon over 40 some years. In this hobby, first appearance correlates pretty poorly with the literal sense. Not really. "first appearance" in regards to comics is widely recognized as being the time the character first appears in a panel of sequential art in the context of a story. No, it's not, IMO. It's almost become a colloquialism. I can tell you that when we set up at shows, innumerable collectors want to look at our copies of the 'first Wolverine', Hulk 181. They verbally refer to it as that. It's a term that has been bastardized, and has almost become shorthand for 'book the market has decided is the character's first meaningful appearance.'

Who are you talking to? The folks who think 'first appearance' is carved in stone as the literal meaning, and not the way it has become used in the comic collecting lexicon over 40 some years. In this hobby, first appearance correlates pretty poorly with the literal sense.

I agree. Not a first appearance, but still a cool item for WD collectors, of which there are many. And, yeah, I agree with X-Men Annual 14, too.