Lazyboy

You're right, everyone used to collect exactly the same way. You're always right... if right means wrong.

Comics never wanted newsstand distributors and retailers to drop them. That was not the publishers' choice. They just reacted and gave a chance to somebody who presented them with another option.

Then your point is just pure bull. It might be closer to being true for slab collectors, but that is nothing.

If you're going to try to convince me of something, using Overstreet after it turned to irrelevant is definitely not the way to do it, especially with your example still being almost two decades old. Again, the point is that origins have been endlessly reprinted and retold. It's not that they don't matter or people care about them any less, it's that they're very easily accessible, in one form or another.

So you're going to stop trying?

I should have known the best response some people would have for this would be to bring up things from decades ago.

Only a very small percentage; the top sellers. The majority were definitely not. There were also a bunch of comics printed over a million in the 1990s. So what? They were already there. No. Why are you talking about subscription numbers? Subscriptions have never been a big thing for comic books.

An origin (that isn't in the same story as the first appearance) is just another story. There's only one first appearance (no, we aren't getting into brief/full here).

The actual problem with origin issues, as I've mentioned before, is that origin stories of older characters have been endlessly reprinted, retold, and altered over the years. The first origin issue is nothing special anymore.

If it's not The Official Marvel Index to the X-Men, this is the closest thing I can think of, but it still doesn't quite match the question.

Well, they do both suck. But The Simpsons used to be great, so the comparison fails there. Wait, is social commentary good, or bad? I'm confused. Maybe only some is good?

That's not a good comparison, even if ads were appearances. 1. That was actually Wolverine in the ad, not just some throwaway character with a similar name. 2. The ads for Incredible Hulk 181 still don't even predate Incredible Hulk 181, let alone Incredible Hulk 180.

Not this again!

Because people made a mockery of the "Comics Related" part of the name for years. It was long past due.

According to what reputable source?

Of course, you understand those rankings are only for slabs (with a single signature) that have been sold through venues tracked by GPA and not necessarily reflective of the CGC-graded totals.

If bricks aren't made perfectly, it is very easy to cause spine curls and/or edge bends.

1. There are very few, if any, CGC 9.9s or 10s of most books, simply because CGC is not in the habit of giving out those grades. 2. There are actually 8 copies of ASM 252 that have been graded 9.9 by CGC. I don't know what you're looking at.

No. No. Sure, if it wasn't Qualified, which it almost certainly would be.

This may be a manufacturing error, but it's not a misprint. Missing and/or extra wraps are not that unusual, though they certainly aren't common. No, the interior cover is missing.

Yeah, it's the nature of that forum. It's not meant for ongoing threads.

As you should. https://www.cgccomics.com/grading/cgc-guarantee/

Is this not a question you can answer for yourself simply by analyzing the Census?

There is a massive difference between those two books. If the ASM doesn't have it, that would actually be concerning.

It absolutely does not. "Poly-bag removed" is a generic issue note for comics that all came poly-bagged. The only reason any specific copy wouldn't have that note is that CGC changed their issue notes at some point. There may be cases where CGC doesn't note it for the issue just because they're terribly inconsistent or an issue came with both loose and bagged copies and it's either impossible to tell the difference or, again, CGC just sucks at noting things properly.