MadGenius

The market loves to ordain cover appearances as 1st appearances even when they aren't (Incredible Hulk #181, Uncanny X-Men #266, Avengers #196, etc.)

Is this situation clear as mud now?

If I had to rank in order of importance: 1. Captain Marvel #17 2nd Print 2. All-New Marvel Now! Point One #1 3-TIE. Captain Marvel #14 / Captain Marvel #17

Yup. The cameo in #14 is tenuous at best.

This is the extent of her appearance in Captain Marvel #17:

Captain Marvel #14 is "technically" the 1st appearance, but it's just a one panel cameo as you see above. Captain Marvel #17 is a last page cameo, BUT she's not named nor do you see her face. Captain Marvel #17 2nd Print trumps both of the other books because she's on the cover in costume. This is more of a 1st appearance than the other two. HOWEVER - All-New Marvel Now! Point One #1 is what I would consider her 1st full appearance. This is the first Kamala Khan story and the first time the character is named. Just my opinion, but I think I'm right.

Mike bought two slabs from my sales thread and paid very quickly. Great communication and very easy to deal with.

Hi, Can the labels for Vengeance #1 and Vengeance #1 Variant Edition be updated to note the 1st Appearance of Miss America (America Chavez) ? Thanks!

Not sure if that's a legit sale considering there are copies on eBay $50 less.

I'll take the 1000:1 on Darkhawk. I'm sure Mantis will appear, but it won't be any type of big deal type reveal. Marvel has so many characters they can work with that it could be anybody. Has Whedon worked on either character? I don't believe so. Because of the large stable of characters Marvel has to work with and the way it made Guardians of the Galaxy into a massive success, I would not be surprised by anything or anybody Marvel or Whedon reveal. Would I lose my mind in excitement over certain characters? Sure. But, would I be surprised the character was introduced? No. I've heard the same rumour a few times and knowing Whedon is involved makes me think it's true. I suspect it's a Whedon written character(s) It'd be awesome if he can figure out a way to work in the Runaways. I repeat: VICTOR MANCHA! Victor is activated at the end of Age of Ultron, but isn't seen again until the SECOND Runaways movie, the first being a surprise announcement after Age of Ultron opens. A man can dream.

I'll take the 1000:1 on Darkhawk. I'm sure Mantis will appear, but it won't be any type of big deal type reveal. Marvel has so many characters they can work with that it could be anybody. 2500:1 on Victor Mancha in the post credits scene as Ultron's failsafe plan is activated.

Bought a WW Hulk book from Chris and was very pleased with the comic itself and Chris' packaging. I wouldn't hesitate to buy from him in the future.

I think the best course of action for CCS and CGC is communication. The TATs at CCS doubled and tripled seeming overnight from what had been on the website. There was no explanation until Matt came on here to provide more info. On the flip side, there would be a lot more goodwill toward CGC and now CCS if they ACTUALLY work to reduce the TATs. CGC TATs have been terrible for YEARS, and I think most of us have lost faith that they will get better. Will CCS follow suit or is this really just a temporary blip that will be corrected? Time will tell.

I subbed books end of October and am now around the 15 week wait without any movement. So I think you'll be in the new TAT if you subbed Dec/Jan. 15 weeks. For pressing? Sorry, I should correct this. I miscounted. If you exclude the week of xmas, I'm at 12 weeks, Monday Feb 9th is week 13. Pfew! 15 weeks was completely unacceptable, but 13 weeks...yeah, totally cool.

I subbed books end of October and am now around the 15 week wait without any movement. So I think you'll be in the new TAT if you subbed Dec/Jan. 15 weeks. For pressing?

My understanding is anything in progress is subject to the TATs as currently stated.

CCS falling behind on TATs is compounding a longstanding problem with CGC. While my experience with both companies has been positive from a product standpoint, the constant issues with TATs are a real issue. For example, I sent in a handful of books for a press/CGC grading in early December. Based on the stated TAT times, the pressing will be done around sometime in early March and then I get to wait another 3 months for CGC to grade them. That's half a year for an end-to-end process that's supposed to take a little over 2 months tops. There's no reason to Fast Track either because those options have also fallen behind where they should be.

The only reason I used them in the first place was because they were "relatively" quick with their services. I'm not sure what happened.

"QuickPress" is also at 4-6 weeks. Isn't this supposed to be the slow season for submissions? Is there even such a thing as a slow season for CGC submissions these days?

Well, I think it's time to create a thread for CCS TATs. When I sent my most recent pressing submissions to CCS (one in December, one in January), the stated TATs were 2-3 weeks for Fast Track and 4-6 weeks for Standard. I just checked the website today and the current TATs listed are: 4-6 weeks for Fast Track 10-12 weeks for Standard WTF?

Does anyone know the difference between CCS' QuickPress vs their standard pressing service, other than the 20 book minimum for Quickpress? The standard pressing service costs $4 more per book and takes 2-3 times as long.

Of the three contenders for Jessica Jones, Alexandra Daddario has the right look. And she is something else in True Detective.

MFT Pre-screen Received: 10/20 Verified: 10/29 Scheduled for grading: 11/04 Graded: 11/05 Grading/QC: 11/15 Shipped: 11/15 Went from graded to shipped on a Saturday.

Is Modern Fast Track given priority over Standard? Both are supposed to have 15-day turnaround times, but it looks like MFT might be faster. Yes, because MFT is supposed to have a 10 business day TAT as opposed to 15-days.

MFT Pre-screen Received: 10/20 Verified: 10/29 Scheduled for grading: 11/04 Graded: 11/05 Grading/QC: Shipped: