Silverdream

Ummm WTTBs A character doesn't have to stroll around in the first book he appears in to be all like " Yo im Gambit, I throw cards and I like Cajun food." He just has to appear. He is named in annual 14, since you obviously have not read the entire thread.

I think you are on track ! Well then, all of these points are being made for people that don't read the books ! Even on-line sites list the annual as the first appearance.Gambit Info Also if the x-men #266 is in continuity ahead of the X-men annual #14 It would be a situation Like Batman Adventures #12 and Batmen:Harley Quinn NN The labels should be similar to them ! X-men Annual #14 : 1st appearance of Gambit in comics (future continuity) X-men #266 : 1st appearance of Gambit in Marvel continuity No.

You are correct about it being discussed here, and other boards before, many times actually. This thread seems to be different in that it hasn't died after 4 pages however, its sticking. I think it's a little too much to say " most" have known about annual 14 being more than a small cameo however. Most here maybe, but to the general collecting community who has used Wizard, Overstreet, and CGC labeling for their information, they are not in the know, and are not steadfast in researching all the information. This really isn't about calling out CGC and its labeling, its been primarily about Gambits first appearance. A few people have noted how they think CGC should label it now, with all of this information being presented better than at any point before. I was disappointed at CGC's response to how they will label the annual going forward, as it's just not honest. If they know for sure, like presented here, they should be honest with how they are labeling the book. Continuing to call it a cameo, refusing to call it a first and throwing in a " predates" which is typically used for previews, is just silly. I think the print run estimate of 200k is high, but I have not done any real research on it. It was part of a big cross over, but it also came out before the huge increases in print runs of late 1992-1995. It's also an annual, which historically, were ordered less. I would say its closer to 100-150k print run at most. Just throwing out a different perspective, really not trying to be argumentative.

I don't think it was years as the facts and illusions set has a date of 1992 on it. The vhs comic set must have packaged after the August SDCC though because that's where the footage is from but I have no idea when the mini comic was published. It's something that definitely warrants further research for Spawn fans. Let me end this debate. Crusade of Comics Presents Spawn #1 (released 8/92 @ SDCC) 1st Appearance of Lotus Origin of Spawn retold Sam, Twitch & Violator Appearance The mini-comic was then repackaged with "Facts and Illusions" & "Lotus" Package with Spawn #1 and given out at 1993 SDCC and sold through retailers like Wal-Mart. The mini-comic was given out at the 1992 SDCC and then again in 1993 packaged with VHS. This is always what I thought, but I could never prove it. Do you have any type of copyright info, or something that shows these dates?

So... If you didn't know the earth was round and always thought it was flat, until you found out the truth recently.... The world will always be flat to you? OK...... Not trying to be mean, but that's what you are saying basically, right?

I doubt that. Look at IH 180 & 181, for a prime example of why not. -slym Did Gambit only appear in one panel of Annual 14? I thought we proved that he appeared in multiple panels across multiple pages. Slym gets a little carried away with Hulk 180 sometimes. I think he was really just pointing out that the popular cover wins out sometimes. Hulk 180 is a borderline cameo on top of that, its not a shadowed face on one tiny panel. The last page of Hulk 180 is epic. Just because this book is obviously a First appearance not a cameo , doesn't mean it will increase in price greatly, or ever be considered " THE" Gambit book to have.

I doubt that. Look at IH 180 & 181, for a prime example of why not. -slym Agreed. We've known about this for years. I truly don't see any changes made on their respective market values. It's all about the covers. I agree. I would say annual 14 will see an uptick once this information is spread out more. Most collectors still truly believe this is a tiny cameo. Neither will do much until they do something spectacular in the movies with Gambit, honestly. UXM 266 has been stagnant for a few years now.

I am not sure there is consensus as to the continuity thing. I would have to go back and re-read them. I don't think continuity should be stipulated either way. Intentional or not. ASM 252 is the first appearance of the black alien costume by release date. However, Secret Wars 8 is first in continuity. Should they go back and label ASM 252 like you are saying above? I mean, that's like 6 months+ haha. When you start talking about " continuity first appearances" you get into to trouble because of flashbacks, origins, time travel and so fourth. Release date is the standard. No Asterisks needed, in my opinion.

The one thing ive always wondered was, was this book ONLY packaged with the DVD? I mean, we can date the DVD and the package this mini comic was included with to around Spawn # 4. Obviously well after. I have just found enough of these in differing collections that make me wonder if they were standalone books at some point. I suppose Jason Pearson could give us some info about it, as this was VERY early in his career. He isn't the most hospitable fellow nowadays, however. Who knows what Mcfarlane would tell us. The guy admitted a few times he has cases of Spawn # 1 in storage still.

And, ladies and gentlemen, THIS is why label notes should not be factored into anyone's purchasing decisions. They simply aren't 100% accurate and reliable, nor should they be. They are just CGC's opinion. Therefore, this "OMG, THE LABEL NOTES SAY THIS AND IT SHOULD SAY THAT AND OMGOMGOMGOMG WHAT AM I GOING TO DO!!!!!???" is really a bunch of melodrama for no purpose. The label notes are a courtesy. They are free. They should not EVER take the place of what the hobby, and most importantly, the individual collector, decides what is important about any particular book. Those of you who agree need to point this out, and keep pointing it out, to anyone who argues that the label notes are important in ANY WAY. And X-Men Annual #14 SHOULD say: "1st appearance of Gambit (minor)" or something along those lines. If X-Men #266 needs to say "1st full appearance Gambit", that's fine, but it really highlights the issue, dunnit? The label notes should not matter, and should not form any basis for someone's purchase. Agree. CGC notes are not the end all be all. They have been wrong in the past and they will be again. To their credit they are willing to correct mistakes and omissions. It is up to collectors and readers to rectify mistakes and keep the flame of reading going. When if first started collecting Avengers, I wanted to own all the key villains that I loved as a kid. Kang, Yellow Jacket... and more importantly Ultron. At the time neither CGC or Overstreet listed his first appearance. I found it odd that the Avengers greatest villain did not have a first appearance. I ended up reading every silver age avengers copy I could get my hands on. It was great fun and great learning. I zeroed in on Avengers 54 and 55. After much debate I chose to believe Ultron's first was 55 because of that fake out in that one panel in 54 (you really have to read it). I found Avengers 55 way undervalued and picked up quite a few every time I saw it cheap. I also picked up 54 when I saw it dirt cheap because as a collector I wanted both. Eventually the Age of Ultron series came out and the movie announcement was made and Ccg started labeling 55 and called it his first. I have some nice affordable copies off 55 and I am a happy more knowledgeable collector. No comment on the notes besides this: When a group of people on their own chat board has provided proper proof that a particular book is in fact a first appearance, then they should start labeling it properly. Being a bonus and that it doesn't "have" to be right is no excuse for this. Calling this book a cameo, with knowledge of this thread, is a misleading and a blatant lie. Plain and simple. They are reluctant to change it properly. For a multitude of reasons. None of which matter. The facts are all that matter.

The only way to get a cheap Morlocks #1 is to look for ones that were already up for auction before the news was announced Yep. I missed this one by about a mile but figured someone might have some of these laying around. Jaw drop.. I have 5 or 6 copies somewhere.. Wonder if those prices will stay by the time I dig them out I ordered about 8 copies a few days ago. Based on my previous order of Captain America #275 from him, chances say I don't see any of them. If that's the case, I'll follow up and out the seller. As promised, I am outing the seller. If anybody shops on Atomic Avenue, stay away from seller mpalish or Forest Creek Comics and Collectibles. For the second time he has cancelled an order of mine because a comic got hot between the time I placed the order and he prepares for shipment. This type of practice is becoming standard for many comic sellers. Why do the work if someone else will let you know whats hot by ordering multiples, then cancel them and raise your price. I don't get it. It's lazy and just plain bad business. They are in the business of selling comics, keep up with it. If some random collector can beat you to the punch, then you should suck it up and fill the order. Ive made a few purchases like this where I got a little note in my box saying " Congrats! This book is HOT now! " as if to say... " your lucky I shipped it to you". Jot down their name, and never buy from them again.

The Outsiders story in Brave & Bold #200 falls between issues 3 & 4 of Batman and the Outsiders series, but since it was published first, is considered the key. That is not an example like he was asking for. He is asking for an example for how CGC labels something. To answer your Question, Yes I believe there are other notations that say " Cameo, Pre-dates XYZ " But those are actual cameos, not 10 page full appearances that are being falsely called cameos. If I can remember an example I will post it.

Just to add to this wonderful thread about ad appearances. I don't think anyone here is trying to say that the books with ads are not collectible. The problem has always been calling them 1st appearances, which is inherently incorrect to this hobby and feels like a money grab. Anything is collectible. I know a guy who has been collecting the comic book bags with graphics that are given out at comic shops for 30 years. He loves them, and has 8 magazine boxes full of them bagged and boarded. It's truly an amazing collection, that anyone here would be stunned by.That doesn't mean his bags are worth a large sum of money. If you dig it, buy it. The problem starts when people come on these threads with what feels like an agenda to change what the hobby has been doing for decades. This isn't a hobby about ads for comics, its about the comics. 1st appearances are in original stories, as they were first published in full. Not previews, not ads. Are previews and ads collectible? Sure! Do some of the command a premium? YES! Calling them something they are not is misleading and dishonest however. It seems to me that the collectors who like ads and previews are wanting the market to conform to their thought process, in some part to make what they buy more valuable, or to somehow validate what they like. It's petty. Preview and ad collectors: You are a niche in this hobby. Get over it. That's where you are, and that is where you will remain. Attempting to push this 1st appearance ad stuff on this hobby is just making you look bad. Double cover collectors are a niche in this hobby too, and even though their books are 100's, sometimes 1000's of times more rare than their regular counterparts, they fetch a very small premium. Yet we don't not see this niche group pushing their books upon the general hobby as a whole like you all are. Guess what? I dig previews and ads. I was ordering comics for the store I worked at back in 1992. I ordered an extra copy of the March 1992 previews because I thought it was cool, its on display at my house, right next to my copy of Spawn # 1 ( which is the first appearance of spawn, unless someone can prove that crusade of comics mini was produced well before the Comic con it was made for, which I also have, on the other side of my Spawn # 1) Lets move on now. This is going in circles.

i don't see anything that has to do about comic books heating up but i've only read the last 50 pages or so Someone hear mentioned this within the last 50 pages. That's some heat. http://www.ebay.com/itm/RUST-1-TRUE-1ST-SPAWN-RARE-FOIL-EDITION-6035-NEAR-MINT-MALIBU-COMICS-1992-/161594250789?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item259fc49625 Ween, whats your opinion on the craziness of spawns 2nd ad appearance being called the first ad appearance? I havnt seen you downplay this book at all.

And, ladies and gentlemen, THIS is why label notes should not be factored into anyone's purchasing decisions. They simply aren't 100% accurate and reliable, nor should they be. They are just CGC's opinion. Therefore, this "OMG, THE LABEL NOTES SAY THIS AND IT SHOULD SAY THAT AND OMGOMGOMGOMG WHAT AM I GOING TO DO!!!!!???" is really a bunch of melodrama for no purpose. The label notes are a courtesy. They are free. They should not EVER take the place of what the hobby, and most importantly, the individual collector, decides what is important about any particular book. Those of you who agree need to point this out, and keep pointing it out, to anyone who argues that the label notes are important in ANY WAY. And X-Men Annual #14 SHOULD say: "1st appearance of Gambit (minor)" or something along those lines. If X-Men #266 needs to say "1st full appearance Gambit", that's fine, but it really highlights the issue, dunnit? The label notes should not matter, and should not form any basis for someone's purchase. I've said it before, and I will say it again.... You are right about the notes. It doesn't matter though. The fact is, what CGC puts on that label matters. To who? Maybe not to you or I, or any of the other seasoned collectors here, but it seems to matter to the new age of comic collectors, hobbyists, investors, speculators... whatever you want to call the huge influx over the past few years. Should it matter? Of course not , they should know what they are buying. This hobby has started to get hyper-focused on 1st appearances. Any change on CGC's label for first appearances immediately has an effect on the market, even raw copies. It doesn't matter if they are freebees, or if they can be changed, if they don't have to be accurate. People buy what's on that label. They just do. Change this subject from notes to the designated grade and the same argument happens. Buy the book, not the grade, or buy the book, not what it says on the label are interchangeable here. Just because many seasoned collectors care that two 9.8's can and are different, doesn't mean this new regime does. Miswraps are a big deal to some here, myself included. CGC ignores them for the most part. So do many collectors. I think it's silly, but there isn't anything I can do about it, but buy what I like. That ship sailed years ago.... This one is leaving port. You can argue it until you are blue in the face, but I just don't see the trend changing. I don't agree with it, but I would be doing myself a disservice by not acknowledging what is happening.

No. Wow. This, to me, is unacceptable. They are doing everything they can to NOT call it a first appearance. This isn't a cameo in any sense of the word, not comic book or literal. I would be ok with first appearance ( minor) as RMA suggested and Overstreet started calling it a few years ago. Even though that is incorrect ( in my mind ) as well. They just don't want to ruffle any feathers after nearly the entire hobby said 266 was it for 25 years.

I was just thinking Archie myself.. If Archie got a hold of the costume design and concept before Marvel I believe that would put them very very high up there right about now Not much to debate, I just don't agree with this. It's Gwen Stacy that makes this happen in conjunction with everything else at just the right proportions and timing. Idea and concept? Cool. Catch fire anywhere, not matter what? No. Well timed, still no. If Archie did this, would it be popular? Sure. At 1/1000th the scale. Again, not much to debate, I just disagree. This cannot be proven either way.

I'd be mad if that's what my copy looked like. Ugly. I love it. Too bad it doesn't have a few extra covers as well, I might bid on it then.

So now I can place selling my 12 copies of EoSV2 too early among my trophy shelf of comic regrets Don't feel bad, I passed on 8 copies of the Land variant for $20 each. I hated how big her head was. I did buy quite a few of the regulars, but like you, I sold many too early, in the $40 range for NM. Luckily ive been very busy and didn't get a chance to list the other half of them, and a few went off for grading.

When a seller relists an auction, that watchers typically carry over with it. It's happened plenty of times on my watch list. So no, there wasn't 195 watchers in a few minutes. This book is hot, but not THAT hot. I don't think any auction would get that many watchers in a few minutes.

This was discussed once before in the modern forums, about a year and half ago Here- Gambit 1st in Modern forum Im sure it was discussed prior to this one as well. Ive always been confused about why they called annual 14 a cameo, as I bought and read it new off the stands. Never saw the dude before that!

Gambit appears on 9 ( yes NINE ) pages in 14 total panels. Do not confuse him with Franklin Richards who is also wearing a trench coat in this issue. He is named. Almost gets into a fight with Cable. Mentions that he likes the name " Mr. Sinister" Storm is joking about how he dresses. He talks trash about how some x-men don't know how to hit. It's not a cameo. It's as full of an appearance as one gets until you start talking about a " featured role". He isn't featured in this book, then again, nobody is, so I guess every character in this book, just makes a cameo?

He is named. Storm is talking trash about how he is dressed and mentions his name "...and calls himself Gambit"

It's almost hard to blame BLMOdirect. He did everything right with his listing , except the " 1st" he threw in at the end of the title. He didn't mention anything about it being a 1st in the description, just that it has a spawn ad. It's obvious he has a few copies of this book, as he sold a few others early last month for cheap, and without the spawn mention. Hard to say what the right thing to do would be. Sell it at his normal price, ignoring the hype? Pull the listing until the smoke clears? He definitely should not have put the " 1st " in there. This listing was honest and fair in my book. Thats fine... Let me have it , Its still not an honest sale, as the buyer who purchased it was surely influenced by the other auction(s) or online forums. I don't think anyone is randomly going to buy that issue for $100 out of nowhere without being influenced by something greater than what his listing stated.

Ah good times. You made me dig out my cards. I knew I had a few of those! I do not recall what month those cards were released. It would have had to have been January or February 1992 for that to be true. The cards only have 1992 printed on them. Strange that the image is the cover of issue # 2. It does mention that Spawn is " upcoming" so we have to assume # 1 wasn't out yet, when printed. Not that it matters, i'm not sure the exact date can be easily proven. I have them all, cause I like Spawn and Todd (thumbs u Spawn # 1 is the first appearance, as you said however. The rest is simply cool spawn stuff.