HighStakesComics

Thanks after the last deal went sour I'm happy to have this one go how I wanted it too. Sometimes you'll hit a single, once in a while you'll hit a double and every blue moon you hit a home run. You'll also strikeout and hit into a double play here and there along the way. In the end, it's not the strikeouts or the home runs that will define you. It's all about whether or not you have the courage to swing the bat. Keep doing what you're doing, Gabe! You are headed in the right direction. Have faith that if you work hard and set your mind to it things will continue to improve and get better.

Always polite, professional, kind hearted and quick to ship a comic. Buy with confidence.

7.5

Tough to bet against Comicdey. I'd go along with 8.0.

8.5

Hoard 'em both and pray for a movie announcement

6.0

I can only speak for myself and say why I'm engaged in the debate -- because I want people who might be inclined to spend money on it to know what they're getting...and not getting. I've been burnt by buying things based on what Overstreet told me, reading them, and finding out Overstreet was wrong. So, I'm trying to let people know, if you buy Brave and Bold 54, don't expect to see a superhero team form -- let alone appear -- within those pages. You get three future members working together, yes, but they don't form a team or even decide to. They know exactly what they're getting. A Brave and the Bold 54, or 60. BB 54 has long been established as "the first appearance" and the value isn't going to change. Even if BB 60 suddenly has more popularity, nobody's going to say, well, gosh, now it's BB 60 (or at least nobody in the mainstream). That ship sailed amongst most people. It certainly has at OS. Do most collectors even care? No. That's why I asked the question. If you're lobbying for BB 60 to be "first teen titans", it's the same as those of us who think (and know) Hulk 180 is the first appearance of Wolverine. But who really cares who's right? The book to own is still 181. Just the way it is. And we can all post 100+ pages and won't change a single fact about it except to make you feel good about certain points that you may (or may not) be right about the formation in the team. If you want a 54 you'll have to pay market rate to get one. If you want a 60, you'll have to pay market rate to get one. Even if you really believe 60 is the "first appearance" of the Teen Titans, if nobody will pay you like it's a first appearance, who cares. And are you really satisfied with owning a 60 and no 54, I've never run into a Teen Titans collector who was. Team first appearances are generally better laid out like BB 28 or FF 1 or Avengers 1. Some clear delineation. If this is ambiguous because they didn't use the words "teen titans" in 54, I'm going to grant that is an absolute fact. So what? Let's say these folks are right about it being in 60, not 54. Great. Now what. Mainstream hasn't and isn't going to accept it. When I go to the Guide it'll still say BB 54. When I ask dealers, it's still 54. When it's posted in the Clink auction BB 54 will still say first Teen Titans. Like Hulk 180, it doesn't matter whether you're right or wrong. Because not enough people actually care. Actually, the 60 typically already sells for more in 9.0 & better, with the 9.6 Pacific Coast bringing the highest dollar figure of any graded copy of either book. That said, the 60 is much tougher in higher grade. Mid grade copies of the 54 typically sell for a premium to the 60, but 60 had one of the largest year over year gains of any book in the guide.

Sharp copy, Duck! Love it!

If there were hundreds of appearances afterward of the Metal Men/Atom team, then yes, that would be their first appearance. No it wouldn't be. You don't even know if a team exists at this point, let alone if they have a name or whom the roster consists of. Best watch yourself, Sir. You are making a very strong argument for the 60. That's where we fundamentally disagree, as I've said repeatedly in this thread. I don't care when they get a name, and I don't care if we know a team exits at the time that they first gather to defeat a bad guy. Their first adventure is their first appearance. Yes. Consistency in short supply as well...

If there were hundreds of appearances afterward of the Metal Men/Atom team, then yes, that would be their first appearance. No it wouldn't be. You don't even know if a team exists at this point, let alone if they have a name or whom the roster consists of. Best watch yourself, Sir. You are making a very strong argument for the 60.

Casey is polite, professional and reliable. I would not hesitate to do business again.

Blame our very own superhero, the Automatic Man (a.k.a. sfcityduck). That's unfair. There's more than one person who agrees with him (and counting it seems). Don't get cocky. I've got panels?

And the same 3 points I made on page 5 hold true. None of these can be disputed without the use of a subjective argument. Sure they can. As an example, you're item number 3 is not based in any fact. Wonder Girl, according to the "brief history of the Teen Titans" set forth in Teen Titans 1, was "an addition to the new team" not a "founding member." All of your assertions boil down to one argument: You think that the group named the Teen Titans could not come into existence until it was named. That's a subjective evaluation that most of comicdom and D.C. disagree with. The first panel to introduce Wonder Girl is the same panel that "introduces comicdom to the Teen Titans", or do you still contend this doesn't really mean comicdom was introduced to the Teen Titans? Nothing in BB 60 says "introducing the Teen Titans." Teen Titans 1 doesn't say what you keep claiming it says. It states: "Next time around, in B&B 60, we took the lead from the vast number of fans who called for the addition of Wonder Girl to the new team, and we introduced them to comicdom as the Teen Titans." Get it? The team started in BB 54, "next time" it appeared was BB 60, with the "addition of Wonder Girl" and the new roster was introduced (e.g. named) "as the Teen Titans." Added a member and gained a name. That's what BB 60 did. The (e.g named) and the subjective underlining are blatent misrepresentations

If that's the case we can agree to disagree. No hard feelings (thumbs u

I would agree it does not happen often but this is a unique scenario. The most obvious example that comes to my mind is Fantastic Four #66, which CGC considers Part 1 of Warlocks 2 part origin, without calling it his first appearance or cameo. I feel a similar set of circumstances is occurring here. You see that 3 of the members came to meet but the team, it's name, it's roster and it's brand are not revealed until the 2nd act. 54 is an important book, but it lacks the intellectual property.

And the same 3 points I made on page 5 hold true. None of these can be disputed without the use of a subjective argument. And, yet another subjective argument based on a factual misstatement. BB 54 does not say it is a "team-up." A team-up is a one time short that doesn't lead to anything. In contrast, BB 54 used the term "team," which is when a "team-up" evolves into a regular grouping, which is clearly what happened here. BB 60 is the "next time" the "new team" appeared according to Teen Titans 1, so the facts don't support your subjective opinion. There's a reason comic fans didn't rise up in outrage when the Price Guide listed BB 54 as the first Teen Titans in 1980. It was obvious to everyone that it was. Subjective. The word team is used in a manner consistent with other teams formed within the same run within the same team up title

And the same 3 points I made on page 5 hold true. None of these can be disputed without the use of a subjective argument. Sure they can. As an example, you're item number 3 is not based in any fact. Wonder Girl, according to the "brief history of the Teen Titans" set forth in Teen Titans 1, was "an addition to the new team" not a "founding member." All of your assertions boil down to one argument: You think that the group named the Teen Titans could not come into existence until it was named. That's a subjective evaluation that most of comicdom and D.C. disagree with. The first panel to introduce Wonder Girl is the same panel that "introduces comicdom to the Teen Titans", or do you still contend this doesn't really mean comicdom was introduced to the Teen Titans?

And the same 3 points I made on page 5 hold true. None of these can be disputed without the use of a subjective argument.

That's how I would depict what Robin is saying in this panel, which takes place in 60. Origin, prototype, genesis something occurred in 54. It just wasn't the formation of the Titans. If it was, surely a panel would be posted by now, which by the way, I don't fault you at all for not cracking out that glorious 9.4, Sir.

I've probably sold 3 or 4 since this thread started and not once have I ever listed a copy of 54 as the 1st appearance of the Teen Titans. Since the events of 54 inspired Robin to form the Teen Titans which he clearly explains to Batman in issue 60, I don't take issue with it being called an origin issue. It's just not the first appearance of the Teen Titans. I've never listed a copy and stated otherwise.

I really don't like misrepresentations. And you are misrepresenting what the editorial in TT 1 states. This has all been covered ad nauseum in the past 10 pages, so I'm not going to repeat it all here. Suffice it to say that the "brief history of the Teen Titans" in TT 1 starts with B&B 54 and denotes B&B 60 only as the "next time" the team appeared with the "addition of Wonder Girl to the new team." This meshes nicely with B&B 54's own statement in the last panel that Robin, Kid Flash and Aqualad were a "new team," and DC's editorial stance today that B&B 54 is the first Teen Titans. The "introduced" statement is taken out of context by you and misquoted. The full statement is: "Next time around, in B&B 60, we took the lead from the vast number of fans who called for the addition of Wonder Girl to the new team, and we introduced them to comicdom as the Teen Titans." Meaning, the "new team" got a new member and a new name in B&B 60, its "next" appearance after B&B 54. All I take away from your posts at this point is that you are trying to distort the record by misrepresenting the facts. So by "introducing them to comicdom as the Teen Titans" you are arguing that they weren't really introduced to comicdom as the Teen Titans? I did miss a word. I used "world" instead of "comicdom". My apologies for the typo. I won't, however, apologize for presenting the truth and I don't appreciate your accusations. If the Titans appeared in 54 you can shut me up with a single panel. Is 54 an origin issue? Sure. I'm good with that. But the Teen Titans did not appear until issue 60. Nothing you can say or do can prove otherwise. You can only supress the truth for so long before it comes to light.

I don't believe I'm being disrespectful to Mr. Haney by bringing to light that this interview, which occured in 1997, references the Teen Titans in this context: "CATRON: And, of course, Robin, Kid Flash and Aqualad. HANEY: Yeah, the first Teen Titans. CATRON: Right. Before they were called the Teen Titans. It was just a three-way team-up, apparently. HANEY: Right. I came up with the name.Teen Titans." I understand that you are a passionate Duck, but I see no smoking gun here. Robin, Kid Flash and Aqualad were the first Teen Titans alongside Wonder Girl. You will get no argument from me. But can we ascertain that Haney is unconditionally blessing the 54 as the annointed, unconditional first appearance of the Teen Titans based on this portion of the interview? Wouldn't this be similar to saying Hulk, Iron Man and Ant-Man were the 1st Avengers? Haney even ackowledges the book was a three way team-up in his very next statement. And to think this all took place in the midst of a discussion about all the team-ups which occured during his work on the Brave and the Bold Also, did Haney write the editorial at the end of Teen Titans #1 where he states #60 was the issue where they were "Introduced to comicdom as the Teen Titans"? If he did, is there really anything here that serves as a more signifcant blessing than that?

There was no OPB "change." The OPB did not denote a "first appearance" of the Teen Titans in any comic until 1980. 1980 was the year that the amount of information offered by the OPB in its listings exploded in volume due to a switch to smaller fonts and, it appears, better use of computers. Now you are the one arguing semantics. Prior to 1980 BB 54 was listed as Kid Flash, Aqualad and Robin per Sqeggs earlier in the thread. In 1980 that was changed to 1st appearance of the Teen Titans per your prior remarks pertaining to Edition #10. Did this interview take place before or after OPG listed the book as a 1st appearance in 1980?