RockMyAmadeus

No. This has nothing to do with "for profit" motives. No one is going to lose their credibility, and no one is suggesting anyone "keep changing their opinions." This has just gotten silly. These are customs and traditions that have been agreed upon by consensus....as reflected (NOT "dictated") in the above entities, and many others....over decades. According to whom? You're not the authority. You don't get to make up the rules. Who is "we"...? Unless I'm completely mistaken,,,,and I could be...that ad appeared BEFORE Marvel Age #29 was published. So....

No, the cover is not an ad for a character to entice a reader to buy other issues. You are stretcccccchhhhhhhhhing the definition of "ad" to make it fit your "rules." There are all sorts of reasons why an editor would use a piece of art for a cover and not intend it to be an "ad." It could have been a job that the editor didn't think worked on the first print, but would be ok for the second. It could be a paid-for inventory piece that the editor liked. Unless it identifies itself as an ad...either directly or indirectly...then it is not an ad. As to the second statement, I already have, and do so again: The Overstreet Price Guide, All In Color For A Dime, Comics Buyers' Guide, this message board, etc etc etc. This IS NOT the first appearance of Longshot and Ricochet Rita. It is an ad. But...it appears IN PRINT prior to the publication of Longshot #1. It is STILL not the first appearance of Longshot and Ricochet Rita. It is only an ad. This IS NOT an ad. It is the cover to a comic book.

I didn't decide the rules for anyone. I merely report what is. The cover is not an "ad for something else" unless it identifies itself as an "ad for something else." And a preview is a preview...it is not the actual thing which it is previewing, or then it wouldn't be a preview. You, yourself, can't even talk about it without acknowledging that it is a preview: "But a preview of a story...." It's either a preview, or the actual thing. It cannot, simultaneously, by both...except maybe in Quantum Physics. I'm sorry these things aren't clear to you, but the entire rest of the comic collecting world has no problem with this, aside from the group who wants to change the rules. No need to be upset about it.

@dena Pfffft. Clever, but not at all subtle, attempt at a custom title. The coolest kids don't have ANY custom title.

So, the title was the best comic...single...you have ever read. That would have to be Swamp Thing #21, The Anatomy Lesson. There are so, so, so many contenders. But having to pick just one...that would have to be it. Greatest single issue comic book ever created.

The exceptions are your examples, (Metal #3/Teen Titans #12, Ms. Marvel #17 2nd, Hulk #1) not the "current standards." Again...if we cannot even communicate, there is no foundation for discussion. We are having multiple communication breakdowns. I already have, but I can do so again: The rule: a first appearance occurs when a character appears in the context of a story. Exception: first appearances that are on covers only. There is the rule, and there are the exceptions that make the rule. "But, but, but, but Overstreet defines "first appearance" or "debut" as "the first time a character appears anywhere"!!! Except that's not true, and Overstreet...not anticipating the pedantic nature of future comic fans...almost certainly did not intend that definition to cover previews and, in fact, Overstreet contradicts itself in its own pages. Sabretooth, for example, appears at the bottom of the last story page of Iron Fist #13...yet the "first app" of Sabretooth is listed as #14. Multiple Marvel and DC characters appeared in house ads for upcoming books. Are those "the first time a character appears anywhere"...? Yup. Does that make those house ads....those previews....the actual first appearances of those characters...? No. "But, but, but, but....a PREVIEW matches your rule for first appearances!!!" Not true. Those pages...to whatever extent they appear, whether a single image in a house ad, or a 10 page preview...are intended, quite obviously, by the publisher and creators to be published in an upcoming book. If that's the case...then those pages are merely an ad for an upcoming publication, and not the publication itself. I don't have a problem with first appearances being on covers only, provided they are the covers of actual comic books with actual story...not previews. Show me a preview book with a story that is unique to that book, and not intended to be printed in an upcoming publication...like Marvel Age Annual #4, for example...and I'll gladly agree with you.

After all, these are the most valuable, therefore the first appearance. It's not possible to have a discussion if...for whatever reason, your fault, my fault, the universe's fault...we cannot even communicate the most basic of concepts to one another. Read what I wrote, quoted here again. If you're going to continue to pluck exceptions (such as characters appearing only on covers; a rather novel, recent innovation) to make points about the rule, then we don't have a foundation for discussion. For the record...appearing on the cover of a published comic book...rather than a preview...is perfectly legitimate.

You're either practicing sophistry, or you have a compulsive need, a la Sheldon Cooper, to be completely literal, incapable of understanding metaphor, which would explain why you consider previews to be first appearances. I don't know that further discussion will prove fruitful for anyone reading.

I feel like this is an episode of Punk'd. Ashton, is that you....?

Nope, Scott Snyder said Metal #3 is the first Batman Who Laughs. Market is paying more for Teen Titans #12 and CGC has labeled it as such. Contrary to what the creator has said. But, but, right above here I have a quote saying the publisher intentions matter..... You're practicing sophistry. This argument isn't about unsettled issues like the above "Batman Who Laughs" situation. Obviously, that needs to be sorted out by the market. You cannot pluck isolated examples that are exceptions to the rule and claim you've made your point. And when I say "publisher intentions matter", it doesn't mean "determining what is an actual first appearance when there's a question/conflict." The publisher of Walking Dead #1...Image...and its creators...Robert Kirkman and Tony Moore...call Capes #1 and Agents #6 previews. Their intentions do not conflict. There is no question, according to their representations, about what the first appearance of Rick Grimes and The Walking Dead is. Again....no idea why this is even an argument. Are you "shrewbeer" on Voldemort's board...?

Ahhhh, nope, wrong again. That is, of course, a contravention of both the facts and the intentions of the creators and the publisher. "Previews", by their very nature, are advertisements. They are not intended to be....and we know this from the creators and the publisher...actual representations of the material they are advertising. You may dispute this...and good luck trying to convince people otherwise...but that doesn't change the facts of the situation. An appearance in "Previews magazine" or in preview form in another comic book does not, and never has, constituted an appearance, either by definition or by custom. No, now you're saying an advertisement with an image is the same as a preview story. It seems like you're off on this argument so you are just throwing out different scenarios that are not related in any way. That is incorrect. You are misinterpreting/misunderstanding the point. YOUR argument is that an appearance in a "preview" is the ACTUAL "first appearance" of comic book characters, despite the intentions of the creators and publishers. Extending YOUR argument out, then any appearance in print prior to the intended "first appearance" is, therefore, the "actual first appearance." Therefore...if Daredevil #13 has a house ad for Fantastic Four #45, clearly showing the Inhumans on the cover....published prior to the actual appearance of the Inhumans in FF #45...then Daredevil #13 (and any other Marvel publication showing the cover of Inhumans #45) is the "real" first appearance of the Inhumans. Wash, rinse, repeat. That's according to YOUR argument. You can't make a distinction between a preview that is ONE page (in this case, the cover) and a preview that is SEVERAL pages (4-5 or whatever length the preview is.) It is either all "appearances", or none of it is. I really can't believe there's argument about this, but....I guess that's the comic book world for you. You sure you're not just having fun, here...?

I hope you're joking. Do the math, if supply was 1 copy and demand was every-person-on-Earth, you're saying value would be almost zero. I don’t think he was posting it as an equation. Switch out the slash for a +.  Which still doesn't make the original comment very clear. No one in this conversation was disputing that supply + demand = value. That's exactly the point. The logic...to go back to my original quote: "The value doesn't determine the first appearance...the first appearance determines the value."....is straightforward: the value of the book, WD #1...that is, the demand relative to the supply....is because it's the real first appearance of Rick Grimes and "the Walking Dead", as opposed to Capes #1, Agents #6, or even Previews magazine. The book is valuable precisely because there is a limited supply and a substantial amount of demand for it...which demand is driven nearly entirely by the fact that it's the real first appearance of (Kirkman and Moore's) "The Walking Dead."

If he did what made him happy, there's no argument against that. That's the only thing that matters. But talk about an opportunity wasted... And the sad thing is, it's not like he wasn't used to a monthly schedule. He worked on the Hulk for almost three years on a monthly schedule, with only a handful of fill-in issues (#368, #378, #380.) I've gotta get to work on that Keown Hulk SS 9.8 run. Maybe I'll even sign a 393 myself.

By the way....the artwork is very, very slightly re-worked on the Super Powers special edition. Looks like someone (maybe Saviuk) lightboxed the art.

You know, they say that Alex Saviuk did the art for that...and it's possible....I don't think Kirby was involved...but it looks a lot more like Jose Luis Garcia-Lopez to me. Could be wrong.

And anyone relying on CGC labels is doing themselves a disservice. That information is 1. not rigorously validated on a recurring basis, and 2. merely a courtesy by CGC, and not intended to be "the authority." I fully understand that a certain amount of people...unknown and unknowable as to extent...use those labels as gospel. That is a mistake.

Hulk #180 and #181 also aren't relevant to this discussion. Hulk #180 isn't a preview of #181, in the sense that you're using it. The reason these previews have value now is because of the small, loud minority of people who are trying to drum up support...and, in many cases, spending their own money...to try and create demand for these books...and, obviously, that's going to create a measure of it. In 1996, the entire run of Marvel Age had no value, because no one considered them anything other than what they were: preview books. In 2006, the entire run of Marvel Age still had no value, for the same reason. However, it's true that a small but determined group of people can throw some pebbles into the sea and create some ripples. Getting those ripples to last is the trick.

"We" didn't. Value doesn't determine a first appearance. A first appearance, on the other hand, determines value.

The Overstreet Price Guide, GPA, eBay, the late, great Comics Buyers Guide, All In Color For A Dime, Tales From The Database,the Krause Standard Catalog of Comic Books, Comichron, etc etc etc. The situation with Aliens is not relevant here. Why? Most importantly, even if, in some bizarre twist, DHP #24 came out BEFORE Aliens #1...and I don't believe that happened...the material in DHP #24 is UNIQUE to DHP #24. It is not an exact reproduction of pages destined to see print in another book. Publisher intentions matter.

Where have I heard this before? Hmmm, 2 pages ago? Now you're confusing "value" and "first appearance". No, I'm demonstrating demand. Value has nothing to do with determining fact. However...it does demonstrate demand, to a degree. If two items are otherwise identical, or close to identical, in supply....and one is worth far more than the other...there's a reason why. That reason is because one has something intrinsic about it that fuels greater demand...and thus, higher value. Capes #1 only sold, in its first month (the same month as Walking Dead #1, October of 2003) 6,168 copies. That's a good 15% less, making Capes #1, in very, very broad terms, "less plentiful" than WD #1. And yet, Capes #1 is worth a fraction of Walking Dead #1...because the collecting community, en masse, recognizes that Capes #1...and Agents #6...aren't "real" first appearances...it's just a preview. The value doesn't determine the first appearance...the first appearance determines the value.

Hmm, yeah. Consensus means something. Just because a small, but very loud, very vocal, tiny minority of people want to pretend otherwise, trying to redefine what constitutes an appearance to "previews" of identical pages from an upcoming book isn't going to catch on...in the future...because it's opposed to common sense. "This preview book is the first appearance of The Catlasher!" "It is?" "Yes! See? Clearly, here is the Catlasher, depicted prominently, in a book that was published PRIOR TO Indefatigable Impman #378, which, for some strange reason, some people are calling the Catlasher's first appearance." "But...isn't that preview book just a few pages taken from Indefatigable Impman #378....?" "Yes, but as you can clearly see, this preview was printed BEFORE Indefatigable Impman #378!! Therefore, it is the REAL first appearance of the Catlasher!" "Um...yeah, that's because it's a preview...it's literally the name of the thing you're holding: 'preview.' That means it's a view of the actual book before it comes out, to garner interest in that book...not to garner interest in the preview itself." "You're not the authority! Catlasher is clearly printed here, so that's clearly his first appearance!!" "ooook." Catlasher & Indefatigable Impman are copyright 2018 RMA productions, Inc. All rights reserved.

To those who want to claim that a preview of pages from an upcoming book constitutes the real first appearance, relegating that upcoming book to the status of a "reprint" (because that is, in effect, what you're doing), I ask you this: What is the first appearance of Rick Grimes and the Walking Dead? Is it Agents #6? Is it Capes #1? Or is it Walking Dead #1? Agents #6 and Capes #1...which I *believe* were shipped on the same week...contain the first several pages of Walking Dead #1. So, if Agents #6 and Capes #1 both contain identical material, and were shipped the same week...which one is the "real" first appearance? And why aren't those books worth far more than WD #1...?

Says whom? You are not the authority on this subject and nobody else on here is either. Is it the first time a character appears in a comic story? YES If you want to make claims about books like FOOM (another one I forgot to mention earlier), than fine. But even 500Club agrees there is a market for things like that and people who believe that.  Says basic reason, common sense, and the entirety of the comic book collecting community, since the dawn of comic book fandom, because we know what the publishers' intentions were. Otherwise...Action Comics #12 would be called the first appearance of Batman, and not Detective Comics #27. Iron Fist #13 would be the first appearance of Sabretooth. And, if the cover of TTA #44, or X-Men #1, or Daredevil #4, or any of the other covers that Marvel previewed in their silver age books, then THOSE books would be the first appearances of Wasp, the X-Men, and the Purple Man, respectively. But they're not. Because comic book buyers...aka "the market"...has understood the intentions of the publishers, and even though many, many, MANY characters appeared in print PRIOR TO their first appearances, the market recognizes that those are merely previews....NOT actual appearances. I didn't invent it...I merely repeat it. Nobody disagrees that there is a market for these things. Stating things with which no one disagrees does not a valid counterargument make.

What's the most famous example of a preview that isn't really a preview...? Amazing Fantasy #15. As the old, familiar story goes, Stan and maybe Steve and maybe Jack wanted to try something different, and Martin said "phsaw! No one will want a superhero that has the powers of a spider! That's too creepy!" So, they put the character in an 8 page tryout in an about-to-be-cancelled mag, and you end up with the 3rd most popular superhero in the entire world. Realize that that's something that they never did with any other character throughout the Silver Age. Spidey is completely unique in that regard. They either introduced a character in an ongoing anthology title....Journey Into Mystery, Tales To Astonish, Tales Of Suspense, Strange Tales...or they simply gave them their own book right out of the gate...FF, Hulk, X-Men, Daredevil. But Spidey was the only one to have his own "preview" in a cancelled title, to see if the character would get any reaction. If Amazing Fantasy #15, however, only contained pages from an upcoming Amazing Spiderman #1, to be published the next month....then Amazing Fantasy #15 wouldn't actually be Spidey's first appearance, and it wouldn't be worth nearly as much as it is. So AF #15 WAS a preview...a tryout...of a concept and a character. It wasn't a preview of an upcoming book. That's the difference.