RockMyAmadeus

Let's not take unnecessary shots, Dunbar (and all shots are unnecessary.) I suspect you didn't read any of it anyways. So...let's be civil, eh?

Kiss me, you fool.

Pedant. In this case, proudly. He clearly meant to make a declarative statement... It's true...Copper's heating/selling well on eBay!

Pedant.

My advice for the invoice: if you do it online, hand write on the printed copies under "Pedigree" that it is the "Canadian Edition" or some such...for each and every one. Maybe underline, too. If you use the pre-printed forms, do the same thing on each line, for each one, and CIRCLE it. And, if you're not sure that's enough, include a nice note making mention of that fact.

I guess that would be me, but I just feel like I'm caught in this spiral of adversarial posting back and forth where everything is becoming more about one-upmanship than anything else. If I'm overreacting, I apologize. I'm not upset or annoyed in the least. It was simply starting to feel repetitive, and mostly due to my part in the discussion. Fastballspecial has an issue with the way I post in general, so I wouldn't take his comment too seriously. He doesn't like "long" posts or anyone he determines is demeaning or overbearing. If you feel there is adversarial posting, or one-upsmanship, two things: first, that's not coming from me. I am not out to "win" anything, nor am I out to make others "lose." I like a vigorous discussion, that really gets into the meat of a topic. That is, after all, how everyone, including myself, learns. I'm not out to shame or defeat anyone (in these discussions), despite what it may seem, or what others may say, but I AM here to challenge that with which I don't agree. It is when we are challenged that we develop the most effectively. Does a weight lifter build muscle without resistance? Does a swimmer get faster without the water pushing back? Does a chess player become a master by only playing children? Second, if you feel that that's happening, regardless of what I say to the contrary, the best thing to do is to not discuss it anymore. Problem solved, no?

Thank you for using facts to dispel what is a commonly stated idea. (thumbs u I've been saying this forever, but apparently no one was paying attention, even with an immediate second printing starting them in the face. If it had a "huge print run", a second printing wouldn't have been necessary. I'd sure like to know where this "ASM #361 had a huge print run" myth really came from. Yes, let's use facts to see who keeps using the words "huge print run" in reference to Amazing Spider-Man #361. This is what I wrote: However, at no point did I use the words "huge print run". Not once. What's weird though, is how you wrote "huge print run" three times, and "large print run" once. Huh. Either way, the facts seem to indicate that your statement should now be changed to "I'd sure like to know where this 'ASM #361 had plenty of copies' myth really came from." Short answer: that comment wasn't directed at you. So no need to get bent out of shape about it. Not everything is about Petey's Wheatcakes. Long answer: That was a general comment (made clear by the context of both mine and 500club's comments), not directed at you specifically. No need to be offended, nor is there a need to parse casual comments that use vague adjectives like "large" and "huge", neither of which have any specific meaning. You are not the first, and you won't be the last, to make the claim that ASM #361 had a (insert whatever adjective best describes your position about the actual size of the print run here) print run. Yes, and they were posted here. You didn't read what I wrote, did you...? Come on, now, you can admit it, don't be shy. Most don't. It's nothing to be ashamed about. (I'm just tweaking you, don't be offended.) You should probably just speak for yourself, and not include me in your (polite) accusations of intellectual dishonesty and pedantry. I'm not terribly offended...you're not the first, and won't be the last...but you have neither been misquoted nor selectively quoted so as to misrepresent your position...one more time, the statement was not directed at you specifically... Nor has the "minutiae" been "dissected." If I "dissect" a point, it is because I think it is germane to the discussion. How else does one establish the facts of any matter? Vague generalities? That's what causes the problems and disagreements in the first place. I won't go into detail about why people make that particular accusation, but it's usually because the data shows they are in error. Facts, shmacts! Who needs 'em? Vague generalities are the way to go! No one cares about the difference between "huge print run" vs. "large print run" vs. "plenty of copies" except you. Which, I agree, is irrelevant minutiae. If you choose to be offended...whether it's legitimate or not...you will be. Good! No one is. This is a discussion, not a courtroom, regardless of how you may think I come across. On the contrary. There have been some excellent details brought forth in this conversation that have informed quite a few readers, if nothing else. And people now have a data-set to work with, so they aren't operating under false impressions about just what exists, and in what quantities. That's very valuable, especially in a "what's heating up?" thread. The more details one has, the better informed their decision making is. And, to my way of thinking, that's ALWAYS a good thing.

The total print run would have been around 400,000-450,000, with newsstand copies making up roughly 150,000 or so of the copies printed, with maybe 75-100k returned? (Returns for newsstand copies were typically around 70% at this point, but a figure of 50% for a hot book wouldn't be unreasonable.) That would give a net distribution of about 300,000-375,000 copies. That's why the majority of the copies for sale at any given time on eBay are for direct copies for almost all books from the era (though, with the current "newsstand is hot!" marketing, and the higher survival rate in general for hot newsstands, the newsstand to direct ratio is certainly more balanced in this case.) These are very rough numbers, just educated guesses, really; the only things we know for sure are Cap City's numbers and the SOO numbers, which gives us an average limit. Here's a good visual of the numbers from JJM at Comichron. http://www.comichron.com/titlespotlights/amazingspiderman.html

Now THAT is a very good point. It is very likely more newsstand copies of 361 (and 362, 363) got swept off the racks than surrounding issues of ASM. Thus, the actual supply may be skewed away from print run data somewhat. Yes, whenever a book was an instant sellout at the direct market level, the newsstands were haunted until the newsstand copies showed up and were gobbled. Happened with Spidey #361, Superman #50, Robin #1, Emerald Dawn #1 (yes, that was a big hit!), Batman #457, Ghost Rider #15, etc. Even Thor #337 and Spidey #252. So it's likely that there are more surviving copies of the newsstand as a ratio of the print run than, say, #357 or #364, even if the absolute numbers were lower. Although, even with (direct market) sellouts, there were always returns for newsstand copies that represented a significant portion of the newsstand print run, too (except for Superman #75 and, possibly, Batman #457.) I wish Emerald Dawn got more love. That was one of the greatest GL stories ever printed.

Thank you for using facts to dispel what is a commonly stated idea. (thumbs u I've been saying this forever, but apparently no one was paying attention, even with an immediate second printing starting them in the face. If it had a "huge print run", a second printing wouldn't have been necessary. I'd sure like to know where this "ASM #361 had a huge print run" myth really came from.

Sexy! I'm working on the entire run in 9.8 SS. I'm about 2/3 there.

I think it's safe to say that no one's forgotten the MVS factor. It certainly does play an interesting role in the issue. However...the discussion was about something being "common", and the examples were Hulk #181, GSXM #1, Spidey #300, BA #12, and NM #98. So the responses were tailored to that criteria. Print runs always matter, because that is the starting point from which any discussion of supply must begin. Even the print run of Action #1...200,000...is discussed, even though perhaps less than 1/10th of 1% of that print run still exists. Everything is comparable in one way or another. It's all relative.

None of the books you mentioned had anything other than average print runs. That's why they are so expensive, while Spiderman #1, for example, is not. X-Force #2 had an average print run for its time period as well........ X-Force #2 didn't have an average print run at all. It was the 4th highest selling book of all of 1991, after X-Men #1, X-Force #1, and Robin II: The Joker's Wild #1. But you knew that. I understand his point, and it's still inaccurate. The books he cited all had print runs in the 200-400k range...not the million+ range (and for BA #12, even lower...the Cap City orders for that book were 19,200! ) Add to that, the fact that most of them were ignored for years, sometimes decades, after they came out, and attrition took its toll. The OPG for GSXM #1 in 1978? $1.80. That is why they have value. Hulk #181 may appear to be ubiquitous, but it's not any more common than any other book of its era, and certainly LESS common than, say, the average Amazing Spiderman from the same period. I know that may not make sense intuitively, because we see Hulk #181 everywhere...but that's only because the demand is crazy. While I agree with nearly everything you've written here, one small quibble - GSXM 1 was selling for much more than that in 1978 routinely at conventions. It popped in the summer. Although by "much more" I mean about $15. Yeah, as I said to Logan later on (and in other threads) that summer was when it really started to catch on. Still, $15 was pretty impressive at a time when new books were 35 cents. But how to explain the OPG prices all the way up to 1980? That I don't know - the end of the 1970s didn't show a whole lot of jumping in prices, which is surprising in hindsight, given both inflation and the huge jump in 1980-81. I can tell you that I made a lot of money as a high school student flipping X-Men books at shows in the Chicago area. When John Byrne was a superstar the likes of which comics had never seen....and probably never would again. McFarlane shows up, and lines are around the block? Byrne could fill an entire convention center. I don't know that it's possible to overstate how big John Byrne and the X-Men were from 1980-1984.

None of the books you mentioned had anything other than average print runs. That's why they are so expensive, while Spiderman #1, for example, is not. X-Force #2 had an average print run for its time period as well........ X-Force #2 didn't have an average print run at all. It was the 4th highest selling book of all of 1991, after X-Men #1, X-Force #1, and Robin II: The Joker's Wild #1. But you knew that. I understand his point, and it's still inaccurate. The books he cited all had print runs in the 200-400k range...not the million+ range (and for BA #12, even lower...the Cap City orders for that book were 19,200! ) Add to that, the fact that most of them were ignored for years, sometimes decades, after they came out, and attrition took its toll. The OPG for GSXM #1 in 1978? $1.80. That is why they have value. Hulk #181 may appear to be ubiquitous, but it's not any more common than any other book of its era, and certainly LESS common than, say, the average Amazing Spiderman from the same period. I know that may not make sense intuitively, because we see Hulk #181 everywhere...but that's only because the demand is crazy. The OPG may have had GSXM #1 at that price, but I can assure you it was selling for more than that in 1978. It wasn't even a $75 book yet, but it certainly was more than $1.80. I guess that depends on how much more you're talking about. I suspect it wouldn't have been hard at all to find a copy for $2 at that year's SDCC, or Chicago. 1978 was a big year for the X-Men, their breakout year, when people started to take notice of the NEW X-Men. But...in the 1979 OPG, GSXM #1 was only $3.75. And by 1980 OPG, it was $9.00. And this is when the OPG was pretty close to the market, as small as it was. Was OPG slow on the uptake...? Oh, sure, it always has been, even when it was as close to the market as it was then. But two YEARS slow...? 1980 was the madness year for X-Men back issues...and, it was reflected in the 1981 OPG, when the book made the leap from $9 to $60, with all the rest following suit. Dark Phoenix was BIG. BIG BIG BIG. But 1978...? Not so much. I had a table at the 1978 Chicago show - we sold all of our New (yes, we filed them under "N") for five and six times Overstreet. We were buying the books from other dealers and flipping them - 13 year olds can get away with it. Well, I dunno how trustworthy your memory is...you're certainly no Gary Colabuono... He was my LCS, if that counts. I'm going to try and set up a time to interview him (if he's willing) at R2D2 this year, if it all works together. I hope so. It would be awesome.

None of the books you mentioned had anything other than average print runs. That's why they are so expensive, while Spiderman #1, for example, is not. X-Force #2 had an average print run for its time period as well........ X-Force #2 didn't have an average print run at all. It was the 4th highest selling book of all of 1991, after X-Men #1, X-Force #1, and Robin II: The Joker's Wild #1. But you knew that. I understand his point, and it's still inaccurate. The books he cited all had print runs in the 200-400k range...not the million+ range (and for BA #12, even lower...the Cap City orders for that book were 19,200! ) Add to that, the fact that most of them were ignored for years, sometimes decades, after they came out, and attrition took its toll. The OPG for GSXM #1 in 1978? $1.80. That is why they have value. Hulk #181 may appear to be ubiquitous, but it's not any more common than any other book of its era, and certainly LESS common than, say, the average Amazing Spiderman from the same period. I know that may not make sense intuitively, because we see Hulk #181 everywhere...but that's only because the demand is crazy. While I agree with nearly everything you've written here, one small quibble - GSXM 1 was selling for much more than that in 1978 routinely at conventions. It popped in the summer. Although by "much more" I mean about $15. Yeah, as I said to Logan later on (and in other threads) that summer was when it really started to catch on. Still, $15 was pretty impressive at a time when new books were 35 cents. But how to explain the OPG prices all the way up to 1980? That I don't know - the end of the 1970s didn't show a whole lot of jumping in prices, which is surprising in hindsight, given both inflation and the huge jump in 1980-81. I can tell you that I made a lot of money as a high school student flipping X-Men books at shows in the Chicago area. THooooose were the days....

None of the books you mentioned had anything other than average print runs. That's why they are so expensive, while Spiderman #1, for example, is not. X-Force #2 had an average print run for its time period as well........ X-Force #2 didn't have an average print run at all. It was the 4th highest selling book of all of 1991, after X-Men #1, X-Force #1, and Robin II: The Joker's Wild #1. But you knew that. I understand his point, and it's still inaccurate. The books he cited all had print runs in the 200-400k range...not the million+ range (and for BA #12, even lower...the Cap City orders for that book were 19,200! ) Add to that, the fact that most of them were ignored for years, sometimes decades, after they came out, and attrition took its toll. The OPG for GSXM #1 in 1978? $1.80. That is why they have value. Hulk #181 may appear to be ubiquitous, but it's not any more common than any other book of its era, and certainly LESS common than, say, the average Amazing Spiderman from the same period. I know that may not make sense intuitively, because we see Hulk #181 everywhere...but that's only because the demand is crazy. The OPG may have had GSXM #1 at that price, but I can assure you it was selling for more than that in 1978. It wasn't even a $75 book yet, but it certainly was more than $1.80. I guess that depends on how much more you're talking about. I suspect it wouldn't have been hard at all to find a copy for $2 at that year's SDCC, or Chicago. 1978 was a big year for the X-Men, their breakout year, when people started to take notice of the NEW X-Men. But...in the 1979 OPG, GSXM #1 was only $3.75. And by 1980 OPG, it was $9.00. And this is when the OPG was pretty close to the market, as small as it was. Was OPG slow on the uptake...? Oh, sure, it always has been, even when it was as close to the market as it was then. But two YEARS slow...? 1980 was the madness year for X-Men back issues...and, it was reflected in the 1981 OPG, when the book made the leap from $9 to $60, with all the rest following suit. Dark Phoenix was BIG. BIG BIG BIG. But 1978...? Not so much. I had a table at the 1978 Chicago show - we sold all of our New (yes, we filed them under "N") for five and six times Overstreet. We were buying the books from other dealers and flipping them - 13 year olds can get away with it. Well, I dunno how trustworthy your memory is...you're certainly no Gary Colabuono...

None of the books you mentioned had anything other than average print runs. That's why they are so expensive, while Spiderman #1, for example, is not. X-Force #2 had an average print run for its time period as well........ X-Force #2 didn't have an average print run at all. It was the 4th highest selling book of all of 1991, after X-Men #1, X-Force #1, and Robin II: The Joker's Wild #1. But you knew that. I understand his point, and it's still inaccurate. The books he cited all had print runs in the 200-400k range...not the million+ range (and for BA #12, even lower...the Cap City orders for that book were 19,200! ) Add to that, the fact that most of them were ignored for years, sometimes decades, after they came out, and attrition took its toll. The OPG for GSXM #1 in 1978? $1.80. That is why they have value. Hulk #181 may appear to be ubiquitous, but it's not any more common than any other book of its era, and certainly LESS common than, say, the average Amazing Spiderman from the same period. I know that may not make sense intuitively, because we see Hulk #181 everywhere...but that's only because the demand is crazy. While I agree with nearly everything you've written here, one small quibble - GSXM 1 was selling for much more than that in 1978 routinely at conventions. It popped in the summer. Although by "much more" I mean about $15. Yeah, as I said to Logan later on (and in other threads) that summer was when it really started to catch on, keeping in mind that the 1978 OPG was completed in Jan-Feb of that year. Still, $15 was pretty impressive at a time when new books were 35 cents. But how to explain the OPG prices all the way up to 1980?

I guess I've misunderstood you this entire time, then? Of course, but that's not what Kevin said, and he's still inaccurate. Again, define "plentiful supply" And I certainly don't disagree with you. I wouldn't go with "far, far greater demand", but it certainly is greater. To what degree will always be impossible to nail down. Cap City numbers: BA #12 -19,200 ( ) Amazing Spiderman #300 - 42,900 (less than Legends #3, by the way, by a not-insignificant amount) New Mutants #98 - 55,200 Compare this to: X-Force #2 - 279.,700 Amazing Spiderman #328 - 73,300 Spawn 1 - 204,760 Spiderman #1 - 426,200 X-Men #2 - 325,500 Superman #75 - 281,400 Circulation Statement (copies sold) Hulk #181 - 202,592 (these are the average number of copies sold for the year in which this book was published. That means *about* 200,000 total copies were sold, and the rest returned for credit. The DM was barely beginning at this point, and would not have constituted a statistically significant portion of sales.) Really puts things in perspective, doesn't it? None of the examples Kevin gave had high print runs, or even modestly large print runs...they were all in the middle to lower end of the spectrum, which is precisely why they have so much value today. Demand + supply = $$$. You read those posts incorrectly. If it had the print run of Spidey #300, it would, indeed, be a $XXX book. There are not only no KEYS, there are almost no BOOKS with that supply, period. Supply is not "of much less importance." It determines the value of every book. Supply AND demand. Ok.

This is contrary to the basic laws of economics. What you are saying does not exist. Supply and demand are inseparable. They are two sides of the same coin. If you don't believe that, your argument is with the laws of economics, not me. RMA is on target. It is supply AND demand, not supply OR demand. Let me put it this way: What many of you consider to be a large print run, isn't. The real question is, what do YOU consider to be a large print run? Let's get specific. Aside from the monsters (Spiderman, X-Force, X-Men) there weren't many titles that had million+ print runs, even for specific issues, up through 1992. The vast, vast majority of books...until 1993...still had print runs in the 200-400k territory. Do you know what the print run for Legends #3 is? Cap City orders have a number of 45,150, against Superman #1 orders of 91,650. (And MOS #1 numbers of 175,000+) Remember...these numbers took DC over Marvel in sales for the first time since 1971. They are gargantuan numbers....for the time period/ Legends #3 was right about in the middle of where Crisis numbers were at...in fact, it beats most of them. And, remember....in 1986, the newsstand was still a force to be reckoned with, with still as much as 40% of all sales in comics. So, Legends #3 probably sold in the neighborhood of 300,000 total copies. Nothing to sneeze at. From the Cap City numbers, it looks like Legends may have been more successful even than Crisis. So, no, Legends #3 is not going to be rare, even in 9.8. PS. X-Factor #6? Cap City orders of 47,200....or just a shade more than Legends #3. Premised, of course, on what you perceive to be higher print run, rather than what actually has a high print run, as shown by ASM #361.

That is an excellent idea. I trust his memory. Of course, actual printed for sale ads would help, too. Anybody got any Buyer's Guides from that time period?

Demand exceeding supply. Are people printing copies in their basement? Is Marvel still printing them? The demand has exceeded the supply, and thus, the price rises. This isn't rocket surgery. Exactly what I'm telling you. So you are basically proving my point now. Because if that print run doesn't change things, then it certainly won't in regard to Legends #3. No, but ok, whatever you say. Why do you think Amazing Spiderman #361 had a "large print run"...? Are you aware (and I ask this rhetorically, because I know you are) that it went IMMEDIATELY to a second printing? Why? Because there wasn't enough to satisfy the demand. Those of you who keep saying "Amazing Spiderman #361 had a huge print run!" aren't aware of the facts, aren't aware of the numbers, and are ignoring the most damning piece of evidence you have against you: the existence of an immediate second printing of BOTH this issue AND the next, practically unheard of! Let's look at real numbers: Cap City orders (remember...about 15-25% of the DM at the time) Amazing #350 - 75,600 #351 - not reported #352 - 65,400 #353 - 79,200 #354 - 76,800 #355 - 78,300 #356 - 79,500 #357 - 76,500 #358 - 98,400 #359 - 60,600 #360 - 57,300 #361 - 68,700 #362 - 76,800 #363 - 102,600 #364 - 72,000 #365 - 221,700 #366 - 89,100 #367 - 77,700 #368 - 71,700 #369 - 71,100 #370 - 67,000 #371 - 66,400 That should be a representative enough sample for all concerned. These are actual, published numbers from the #2 largest comic book distributor at the time. They aren't guesses, or made-up numbers based on fuzzy memories...they are actual, published numbers. And what do you see? You see that the title did well in the 350s, because of the 6 part Punisher/Moon Knight crossover, from a time when Punisher appearance still sold comics. The figure for #358 stands out, because it was a gimmick cover, a gatefold when those things were still rare. But then, what do you see? With #359, the title sank back down. From #359 to #361, you do see an increase...but only by about 20% over #360 and 13% over #359. #358 blows #361s numbers completely out of the water, by a whopping 43%! Then, look at #362...you see another increase, but only about 11% more than #361. This is why both issues went to immediate second printings. Now, look at 363. Because 363 orders were due right around the time #361 was selling out all over the country, it got a substantial boost...a whopping 50% MORE copies ordered through Capital than #361, which is why #363 has always been the most abundant of the three. These numbers clearly demonstrate that #361 was, in EITHER direction, on the lowest end of the print run scale. From #350 to #361, it was 8th out of 11. From #361 to #371, it was again, 8th out of 11 (and just barely.) In fact, considering the SOO, printed in issue #375, these numbers are borne out...there were 660,958 copies printed on average for the year reported, with 544,900 copies sold on average. But, you can see in that year that there were MASSIVE books that totally skewed the average...specifically #365, which was the highest selling book of the month, with well over 1,000,000 copies printed (the first...and probably the last...time that ever happened for an issue of Amazing Spidey.) So, obviously, those numbers are going to be skewed by the presence of these heavyweghts, #363, #365, and #366. So, that means that the books like #361, which were on the low end already, would be driven even lower to make up the average. Methodoloy aside: Now...are Cap City numbers the "real" numbers? No, not exactly. But it has been demonstrated, when comparing Diamond numbers (when known) and Cap City numbers from when they were both in operation, against the SOO numbers, that Cap City numbers can be reasonably be extrapolated to be a certain percentage of the market, across the board. That is, they're "close enough" that these numbers are close to being accurate, especially as they relate to one another among different issues. In other words, Diamond wouldn't have gotten 4 times the orders for a particular issue (think MOS #19) without Cap City getting a concurrent boost. Come on, folks. Don't just make stuff up, using vague descriptions because that's what "you remember." Use hard data, and make real cases. #361 did NOT have a "huge print run", and the published numbers very clearly prove that to be true.

None of the books you mentioned had anything other than average print runs. That's why they are so expensive, while Spiderman #1, for example, is not. X-Force #2 had an average print run for its time period as well........ X-Force #2 didn't have an average print run at all. It was the 4th highest selling book of all of 1991, after X-Men #1, X-Force #1, and Robin II: The Joker's Wild #1. But you knew that. I understand his point, and it's still inaccurate. The books he cited all had print runs in the 200-400k range...not the million+ range (and for BA #12, even lower...the Cap City orders for that book were 19,200! ) Add to that, the fact that most of them were ignored for years, sometimes decades, after they came out, and attrition took its toll. The OPG for GSXM #1 in 1978? $1.80. That is why they have value. Hulk #181 may appear to be ubiquitous, but it's not any more common than any other book of its era, and certainly LESS common than, say, the average Amazing Spiderman from the same period. I know that may not make sense intuitively, because we see Hulk #181 everywhere...but that's only because the demand is crazy. The OPG may have had GSXM #1 at that price, but I can assure you it was selling for more than that in 1978. It wasn't even a $75 book yet, but it certainly was more than $1.80. I guess that depends on how much more you're talking about. I suspect it wouldn't have been hard at all to find a copy for $2 at that year's SDCC, or Chicago. 1978 was a big year for the X-Men, their breakout year, when people started to take notice of the NEW X-Men. But...in the 1979 OPG, GSXM #1 was only $3.75. And by 1980 OPG, it was $9.00. And this is when the OPG was pretty close to the market, as small as it was. Was OPG slow on the uptake...? Oh, sure, it always has been, even when it was as close to the market as it was then. But two YEARS slow...? 1980 was the madness year for X-Men back issues...and, it was reflected in the 1981 OPG, when the book made the leap from $9 to $60, with all the rest following suit. Dark Phoenix was BIG. BIG BIG BIG. But 1978...? Not so much.

What makes a comic valuable is: supply and demand. That's the case now. Will it always be the case? Maybe, maybe not. It wasn't the case in the early 70's, that's for sure. What does "crazy cash" mean, as you define it? Would it sell for what it sells for now? Obviously not, or the laws of economics have no meaning. The demand is clearly there. With an 8 MILLION print run, the demand probably wouldn't be satisfied. But at some point, it would be, and the market would reach equilibrium. This should go without saying, but not everyone in the world wants a copy of Hulk #181.

This is contrary to the basic laws of economics. What you are saying does not exist. Supply and demand are inseparable. They are two sides of the same coin. If you don't believe that, your argument is with the laws of economics, not me. RMA is on target. It is supply AND demand, not supply OR demand. I agree with most everything that has been said. However, as we define supply, there are other factors to consider besides simply print run. A couple of those factor are market bottleneck (how long does it take to get that supply to market) and who controls the supply (dealers, speculators, collectors, others?). These will both influence prices in the short and long term and affect what is the true supply- that being the supply available in the market. Yes, when you're dealing with tangible goods, it is the available supply that determines price according to demand. And this is where a lot of people make a lot of money. Diamonds are filthy common, they're the street rats of fine gems, but the market for them is very tightly controlled, which is why you have to pay $2,000 for a nice 1 carat solitaire. It should be understand, when discussing supply and demand with regards to tangible goods, that it always means the available supply. Unavailable supply has no effect, by definition.

Demand exceeding supply. Are people printing copies in their basement? Is Marvel still printing them? The demand has exceeded the supply, and thus, the price rises. This isn't rocket surgery.