RockMyAmadeus

Damn you and your silly expositions! SOUND BITES! I WANT SOUND BITES!!! Easily digested, utterly inconsequential SOUND BITES!! Reading is for squares.

This. WoS #118 contains the first appearance of Scarlet Spider. He played a pretty big role at the time and still has fans today. Also, while not a first appearance, the second print of Spider-Man 2099 #1 sells for much much more than the first print. Exactly...noted on a CGC label as first Solo clone story. And WD #33 might not be a key first appearance but a key nonetheless. It's not as random as WD #34, hence why I brought it up and offered both scenarios. Jim Web 118 isn't acknowledged as a key first appearance in any literature I have seen. Well, the answer, then, is to read more literature. You say such weird, absolutist things. Spidey #361, like most Copper books, faded into obscurity in the late 90's/early 2000's, and while not a dollar book, certainly wasn't even a $10 book until the last couple of years. As far as your claim that "the second will permanently cede its positioning to the first printing, which is the case 99.9999999% of the time"... Will you please tell me the OTHER examples that make up this "99.999999%"? What "decades of precedent" are you talking about? Later printings didn't even EXIST in mainstream comics until the late 70's, and were utterly ignored until just the last 5 years or so. Bingo! You answered your own question. (thumbs u That answered nothing. What "decades of precedent" are you referring to, where a later printing was TEMPORARILY more valuable than the first printing, then "ceded its positioning" to the first...? Hmmm...? That's your opinion. The market disagrees with you. Again. Does "the market" include CGC, which does not see fit to even mention anything about it on the label ? We've discussed this before. The CGC label notes are COURTESIES, they are NOT part of the service. As such, what appears (and does not appear) in those notes should *not* be construed as definitive of ANYTHING...an argument you, yourself, inadvertently made regarding Hulk #271, whereby people were being "misled" by the fact that it used to say "first appearance of Rocket Raccoon." I think you need a new chair. Now, please answer the question: What "decades of precedent" showed later printings being worth more than first printings, then "ceding those positionings" to the first printings...?

Drek.

This. WoS #118 contains the first appearance of Scarlet Spider. He played a pretty big role at the time and still has fans today. Also, while not a first appearance, the second print of Spider-Man 2099 #1 sells for much much more than the first print. Exactly...noted on a CGC label as first Solo clone story. And WD #33 might not be a key first appearance but a key nonetheless. It's not as random as WD #34, hence why I brought it up and offered both scenarios. Jim Web 118 isn't acknowledged as a key first appearance in any literature I have seen. Well, the answer, then, is to read more literature. You say such weird, absolutist things. Spidey #361, like most Copper books, faded into obscurity in the late 90's/early 2000's, and while not a dollar book, certainly wasn't even a $10 book until the last couple of years. As far as your claim that "the second will permanently cede its positioning to the first printing, which is the case 99.9999999% of the time"... Will you please tell me the OTHER examples that make up this "99.999999%"? What "decades of precedent" are you talking about? Later printings didn't even EXIST in mainstream comics until the late 70's, and were utterly ignored until just the last 5 years or so. Bingo! You answered your own question. (thumbs u That answered nothing. What "decades of precedent" are you referring to, where a later printing was TEMPORARILY more valuable than the first printing, then "ceded its positioning" to the first...? Hmmm...? That's your opinion. The market disagrees with you. Again.

I find this argument specious. The reverse is the suggestion you have no second prints, hence your stance. Jaydog has said many times, and implied even more times, that those who disagree with him are only doing so to protect the market that he thinks they have. By his reasoning, I have cases of Cerebus #1, Spidy #301, Spidey #361 2nd printing, and NO copies of Sandman #8 variant. No one disagrees with him because they find his positions to be untenable, and unsupported by the evidence...no, it's just to protect their market.

This. WoS #118 contains the first appearance of Scarlet Spider. He played a pretty big role at the time and still has fans today. Also, while not a first appearance, the second print of Spider-Man 2099 #1 sells for much much more than the first print. Exactly...noted on a CGC label as first Solo clone story. And WD #33 might not be a key first appearance but a key nonetheless. It's not as random as WD #34, hence why I brought it up and offered both scenarios. Jim Web 118 isn't acknowledged as a key first appearance in any literature I have seen. Well, the answer, then, is to read more literature. You say such weird, absolutist things. Spidey #361, like most Copper books, faded into obscurity in the late 90's/early 2000's, and while not a dollar book, certainly wasn't even a $10 book until the last couple of years. As far as your claim that "the second will permanently cede its positioning to the first printing, which is the case 99.9999999% of the time"... Will you please tell me the OTHER examples that make up this "99.999999%"? What "decades of precedent" are you talking about? Later printings didn't even EXIST in mainstream comics until the late 70's, and were utterly ignored until just the last 5 years or so. And will you also tell me how you can state that ANYTHING in the market will be "permanent"...?

Thank you for the input Jim. However I am struggling to find any "key first appearances" in any of those walking dead books, or the Web of spiderman book. I will admit to having read none of them, though CGC does not denote any "key" first appearances on any of the labels. So it does not appear these are an apples to apples comparison. Web of Spiderman #118 is the first appearance of the Scarlet Spider, Ben Reilly in costume. What...? "First prints will inevitable (sic) march onward and upward. That is history's pattern"...?? Since WHEN?

More excellent examples.

The market is an organic, living, breathing entity, not a chemistry experiment. As such, you can only observe what is, and has been, and not what might be.

By the way....MANY of the New 52 second and later printings are selling for substantially more than the firsts...

By the way....for those counting, there are multiple examples of second printings that are worth more than firsts.. "So Much Fun", for example, are worth substantially more...and they are later printings. The aforementioned Hulk #377 3rd. ALL the JCPenney books (X-Men #268, DD #272, etc.) The Pressman books (reprints.) Detective Comics #659 third, 660 third, Batman #492 third, Superman #75 4th printing newsstand. Green Lantern #51 2nd (look! First appearance!) Batman #608, 612. Numerous Image variants. Let's not forget Spawn #1 Black & White, which is worth FAR more than Spawn #1, and is ALSO a first appearance. (It was late last night, and I was tired. )

Paging Bronzejonny...will Bronzejonny please report to the ASM 361 reasonable price thread...potential occurrence of lowest example of class ever witnessed on the boards in progress....

This is one of the rare instances that the first prints seem more desirable than the second. I've noticed this on raws, as well as graded: At this time that appears to be true. The gap is closing recently. Last year it was crazy to see a 2nd printing get over $100+ in 9.8. This year they have been sales of 9.8 2nd printing in the $200's. That's a big gain in less than 365. Just right behind the 1st printing in 9.8 also in the $200's. I'm interested to see if the 2nd printing pulls ahead. (thumbs u If the only thing significant about the book is its current perception of "rarity", I wouldn't count on it. The vast majority of collectors want the first print of books like this. The second printing doesn't rank much above novelty status. It is the first print that is the "key". It is the first print that will go NM 98-style nuclear if/when a movie announcement is made, and it will be the one everyone will be chasing. (thumbs u -J. Be careful. 'A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.' There are a number of examples now where later printings are more desirable. You may end up being right, but I could see things going he other way. "Past performance is the best predictor of future success.". Name one first appearance "key" where a second or subsequent printing is worth more than the first printing (other than the clearly anomalous MOS 18). -J. You've just qualified the argument beyond the parameters that 500 stated. And why is MOS #18 "clearly anomalous"? What if "Hush" becomes a very popular character? Batman #608 second print is worth substantially more than the first. Nearly 30 years ago, the 2nd print of Adventurers #1 was worth much more, because it was the first appearance of Elf Warrior. It is not without precedent. So that's a "none" from RMA. No, that's not a "none." You already have 3 examples. 3 > none or "none." Sure there is! You added the qualification of "key first appearance", when 500 quite clearly stated that he was talking about later printings in general. That, sir, is the definition of a qualification. No one is disagreeing with your contention that first prints are the desirable one. That is quite obviously and self-evidently true. But you ignore the exceptions that make the rule, which is the issue.

Since this has been brought up.... The census always needs to be considered as a "most potential copies" situation. That is, it's not really a representation of what IS, but rather, what could potentially be. For example: If Book X #17 has 357 copies, of various flavors, on the census...that doesn't mean there are 357 slabs that contain Book X #17, necessarily. There might be...but the reality is, there are probably only 342, or 353, or 321, or 62 copies of the book still in actual, physical slabs. The census represents, in this case, a CEILING, rather than an actual head count. You know that there aren't *more than*357 slabs out there. There. Now, anyone who has been enlightened by this post, please submit $5 to my Paypal account.

PS. Did I type and post all of that for self-aggrandizing purposes, for attention, for people to "look at me"? No. I did it because these are things that I genuinely believe, and Mike has opened a dialogue which I think has worth and value. Will everyone accept my motives as stated? No. Am I ok with that? On a philosophical level, not really (again...we'd all like to be judged for our actual motives, and not what others (incorrectly) think our motives to be), but in a practical manner, I am, because experience has taught me. If I desire peace of mind, I have to accept what is, and not dwell too much on what I think should be.. And for that, I am grateful. (wait...is THIS post all about me...? )

It did....? Sorry Rock...I take it back.The reposting was unfriendly. But...ah,I'll shut it. No problem. It is one more highlight of perspective differences, eh...?

You define community as participation in the way you think it should take place, and you're judging by the appearance, rather than the motive. Why are people taking part in those things? What are their motives? These questions always, always need to be asked, all the time. Is it to promote oneself? Yes, in many cases, absolutely. The motive frequently boils down to "look what a good guy/gal I am for doing thus and such. You should think good thoughts about me." Is that a just, virtuous motive? I don't think so. I don't know that many would think it is. Giving, participating, these aren't bad things in and of themselves. But if the reason is to promote self...and it almost always is, even if that, itself, isn't necessarily a bad thing...is it really "giving"? If there are strings attached...even if those strings are only an expectation of kudos and virtual back-slapping...then have they really given? Or have they merely bartered for what they wanted, and nothing but mere "commerce" (of a form) has taken place? Important questions to consider. Let's consider this example: There are people who share their knowledge about various subjects, who are willing to freely give of their time to advancing general scholarship about the artform. Yes, I have myself in mind, but there are many others who do this as well. Is that self-serving? Are they doing it to feed their egos? To show off how smart they (think they) are? Are they doing it to drive business to themselves? Absolutely, that's certainly true in many cases. Human beings are complex creatures, and there's never really just one simple reason for our behavior. But...has knowledge been increased? Have people learned something, something that can benefit (and has benefitted) them greatly? Yes. Have they learned something, something for which they didn't have to pay much more than the time it took to read, knowledge that was *not* so easily obtained by the person passing it on? Absolutely. And is that not "community fostering"? Yes, it absolutely is! Do you look at that as such? And yet, it's just as valid as any of the other activities you've mentioned as community fostering. How many people who have knowledge stingily refuse to share it, because they had to work for it, so why should anyone else get it for what boils down to "free"? That happens all the time. And that's just one way; there are others. Positive feedback, for one, and encouragement, and mutual interests discovered and expanded. People form bonds in many ways, not all of them obvious. Sure...as long as you're open minded enough to consider things from other people's perspectives. Motive, as always, is the real answer. It's not even actions that speak louder than words...it's the motive behind them that is paramount. Motive > behavior > words. I really don't, and I don't see what you're talking about. I'm not a "member" of any "clique", and prefer to be judged based on the whole body of my words and actions, rather than a few posts here and there that may appear to be a certain way, but may or may not be as it appears. Isn't that how we all would like to be perceived? I was told once that I "didn't possess the qualities it takes to be a moderator", those qualities being an ability to consider all sides fairly, and adjudicate in a measured, balanced manner. How this person came up with this statement, when I can honestly say that my motive has always been (though marred by my own petulant impatience and arrogance, no doubt) to achieve a fair, balanced, reasoned analysis of what really exists, and why...a "credit where credit is due" philosophy, "can we not reason together?", acknowledging the truth no matter from where it comes...is anyone's guess, but it does highlight the issue of perspective quite neatly. Then again...maybe I'm just blind, myself.

Ketosis, baby!

This is one of the rare instances that the first prints seem more desirable than the second. I've noticed this on raws, as well as graded: At this time that appears to be true. The gap is closing recently. Last year it was crazy to see a 2nd printing get over $100+ in 9.8. This year they have been sales of 9.8 2nd printing in the $200's. That's a big gain in less than 365. Just right behind the 1st printing in 9.8 also in the $200's. I'm interested to see if the 2nd printing pulls ahead. (thumbs u If the only thing significant about the book is its current perception of "rarity", I wouldn't count on it. The vast majority of collectors want the first print of books like this. The second printing doesn't rank much above novelty status. It is the first print that is the "key". It is the first print that will go NM 98-style nuclear if/when a movie announcement is made, and it will be the one everyone will be chasing. (thumbs u -J. Be careful. 'A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds.' There are a number of examples now where later printings are more desirable. You may end up being right, but I could see things going he other way. "Past performance is the best predictor of future success.". Name one first appearance "key" where a second or subsequent printing is worth more than the first printing (other than the clearly anomalous MOS 18). -J. You've just qualified the argument beyond the parameters that 500 stated. And why is MOS #18 "clearly anomalous"? What if "Hush" becomes a very popular character? Batman #608 second print is worth substantially more than the first. Nearly 30 years ago, the 2nd print of Adventurers #1 was worth much more, because it was the first appearance of Elf Warrior. It is not without precedent.

The above post is said without snark of any kind, and is a sincere response to the issues raised.

But, don't you see...? You're doing the same thing that you're complaining about others doing: not seeing what there is to see. First, you say the people who criticize community do nothing to foster it...why would they? Why should they? If these people don't feel this is a community, nor can or should be one, why would they be interested in doing anything to foster that which they think should not, or cannot, be? Second, according to whose criteria are they "doing nothing to foster community"? Yours? Mine? Arch's? Third, are those people bringing up their apparent disdain for "community" in a vacuum? Or, are they responding to people who have made the positive claim, and the respondents feel it necessary to "correct the record"? Or does it matter? Who is right? Who is wrong? Fourth, according to whose criteria are comments "snarky" ..? Of course, there are obviously snarky comments, which are meant to be, and are obvious to all. But what if someone is making an earnest point, but someone else doesn't agree with it, and looks at it as snarky? You've made sincere comments that have been called snarky by others. So have I. So has most everyone. Upon whom is it incumbent to make sure people understand not just the words, but the motives behind them? The writer? The reader? A little of column A, a little of column B? That's the beauty of broad perspective: what is "fostering community" to some can be (and is) completely missed by others. I think posting endless hard rock videos is an annoying waste of my time (just as an example), and certainly does nothing...*for me*...to foster community. For me, it's quite the opposite. But there are other members who think that's the greatest part of this board, and absolutely "fosters the community"...for them. Am I wrong? Are they right? No, I'm not wrong. And neither are they. They get what makes them happy, and I simply avoid those posts. It's a combination of patience on my part, and restraint on others' part to not turn every thread into an endless MTV ad. Self-awareness is a very, very rare commodity. And projecting one's own methods and motives on others is very, very easy and extremely common. When you say "people can't see themselves", how do you know? Is it so simple, and obvious, to know what is going on in someone's head? Are motives so clear, all the time? Maybe they CAN see themselves, but the way they see themselves is not the way YOU see them? In that respect, wouldn't it be more correct to say "People can't see themselves the way I think they should see themselves"...? People see what they want to see. It takes a deliberate act of will to see through one's biases and perspective, an act of will that not many are even capable of performing, much less willing. But why is it *your* perspective on the matter which is the correct one? Is it really "butthurt and grudges" that are driving the commentary ?(For the record, I've said nothing about it here.) Or, is the commentary driven instead by a measured and objective analysis of the situation? Again, who's to say? You? Me? Arch? Branget? There is much wisdom in those words. However, there is also wisdom in not letting go that which should be addressed and dealt with. And who determines which is which? It always comes down to perspective and attitude.

This is one of the rare instances that the first prints seem more desirable than the second. I've noticed this on raws, as well as graded: At this time that appears to be true. The gap is closing recently. Last year it was crazy to see a 2nd printing get over $100+ in 9.8. This year they have been sales of 9.8 2nd printing in the $200's. That's a big gain in less than 365. Just right behind the 1st printing in 9.8 also in the $200's. I'm interested to see if the 2nd printing pulls ahead. (thumbs u If the only thing significant about the book is its current perception of "rarity", I wouldn't count on it. The vast majority of collectors want the first print of books like this. The second printing doesn't rank much above novelty status. It is the first print that is the "key". It is the first print that will go NM 98-style nuclear if/when a movie announcement is made, and it will be the one everyone will be chasing. (thumbs u -J. Here's where you might have a problem... When Spidey #361 2nd print came out, later printings were one step above bubonic plague. People bought them, but only if they were forced to, and had no other choice, if they wanted to read them. They CERTAINLY never bought them to collect. And, it would be another decade before anyone took a "later printing" seriously for any book. That means this book, and others like it, suffered from attrition rates far above normal for the first printings. That, and the metallic, unforgiving ink means that it will be a difficult book to track down in 9.8. Not rare...there will likely be more 2nd print 361s on the census than first print #301s by the middle of next year...but certainly toughER to find than first prints, for sure. The fact that it is a second print definitely counts against it...but these days, the mentality of "2nd printing?? EWWWW! Get it awAY from me!!" is long gone. We shall see. Maybe I was an aberration, but I grabbed the second prints for my collection when I saw them. Granted I only grabbed one of most, because I didn't think they were going to be valuable, but I wanted it for my collection. (Mainly just the Marvel ones with the metallic ink, though; I didn't think the roman numerals on the DC reprints made them all that desirable, and still don't.) The DC's generally had different colored logos, or had different cover verbage, starting with Superman #50. I think the different colored logos were an outstanding idea. Really makes the books look neat next to each other.

Awakeintheashes sighting! I know, right!

This is one of the rare instances that the first prints seem more desirable than the second. I've noticed this on raws, as well as graded: At this time that appears to be true. The gap is closing recently. Last year it was crazy to see a 2nd printing get over $100+ in 9.8. This year they have been sales of 9.8 2nd printing in the $200's. That's a big gain in less than 365. Just right behind the 1st printing in 9.8 also in the $200's. I'm interested to see if the 2nd printing pulls ahead. (thumbs u If the only thing significant about the book is its current perception of "rarity", I wouldn't count on it. The vast majority of collectors want the first print of books like this. The second printing doesn't rank much above novelty status. It is the first print that is the "key". It is the first print that will go NM 98-style nuclear if/when a movie announcement is made, and it will be the one everyone will be chasing. (thumbs u -J. Here's where you might have a problem... When Spidey #361 2nd print came out, later printings were one step above bubonic plague. People bought them, but only if they were forced to, and had no other choice, if they wanted to read them. They CERTAINLY never bought them to collect. And, it would be another decade before anyone took a "later printing" seriously for any book. That means this book, and others like it, suffered from attrition rates far above normal for the first printings. That, and the metallic, unforgiving ink means that it will be a difficult book to track down in 9.8. Not rare...there will likely be more 2nd print 361s on the census than first print #301s by the middle of next year...but certainly toughER to find than first prints, for sure. The fact that it is a second print definitely counts against it...but these days, the mentality of "2nd printing?? EWWWW! Get it awAY from me!!" is long gone. We shall see.

You're the one who made the claim, first that there were only around 30 copies, then upping it to around 100, of the Sandman #8 variant still extant. Based on what...? The census numbers. You can't have it both ways. Seriously, let it go already it's apples and oranges. Not only are you mis-quoting me, you are making statements in a vacuum. Sandman 8b IS a rare comic from the copper age, and worth several hundreds of dollars in low grade raw because of that, and the fact that it is a key first appearance in the series. Neither asm 361 second print nor asm 301 , any print, in 9.8 or otherwise are "rare", and never will be. This non-argument you have been attempting to make across multiple threads and sub-forums has grown tiresome. Let's please change the channel. -J. No, that's pretty much a completely accurate representation of your comments, as others have also pointed out. If you find the "non-argument" tiresome, you should stop making it. I wasn't the one who said "low census numbers" = "not many copies extant"; you were. And you cannot have it both ways. If you don't like your arguments biting you in the rear, make better arguments. It's pretty straightforward.