RockMyAmadeus

:o

As I have noted before in detail, there is very little mention of "Cable", "Liefeld" or "New Mutants #87" in the Overstreet update reports that were written in early September of 1990 (the same time issue #95 was about to come out.) There was some mention...but it was very little. What was ultra hot at the time was X-Tinction Agenda, McFarlane Spiderman, and Ghost Rider. Not saying that it wasn't possible that some stores priced it at $25 (after all, I bought my copies from the wall...they were just priced at $1.25 each.) But let's be reasonable, people...don't you think, if an 8 month old comic was selling for $25, it would have been highlighted in several of the Update reports...? Ghost Rider #1 sure was. It WAS a $25 book at this point, and it was mentioned in almost every single update, prominently. McFarlane Spiderman was, too. But Cable, Liefeld, #87....? Buried, mentioned in a scant TWO reports from that month, and mostly by Greg Buls (who admittedly has a keen nose for this stuff.) Why? What possible explanation can there be to explain how, in the September, 1990 Overstreet Update market reports, there are but TWO mentions of this supposedly "ultra hot" book/title/artist? Reason says the memories are from another time period (maybe 6 months LATER), and what was written and published from the time is much more accurate. Rather than rely on memories that are now 24 years old, I'd much rather rely on published information that was written at the time, when the things discussed were happening, by a good cross section of the retailer community. That's because it's not right, Whet. And, of course, not at all what I said. 55,200 is the number of orders that Capital City had. Capital City was only part of the distribution market at the time. Diamond was bigger (not much bigger, but bigger), and there were also other, smaller distributors and the newsstand. We use the 55,200 number, along with the SOO numbers, because those are the only numbers available. Then, those numbers are extrapolated to make a reasonable estimate of total print run and sell-through. And the existing numbers are undeniable: the order numbers for #98 were a whopping 15% less than for #97. They were down, just like they were for X-Men #273 and X-Factor #63 (which took the biggest hit....25%.) It is entirely outside the realm of reason to suggest that #97-100 sold "500k copies", for reasons already detailed. Is it possible that Cap City was different from everybody else, and the orders for Diamond and the newsstand were all higher? Sure, anything's possible. Is it likely? No, of course not, not if you know anything about statistics and likelihood. This isn't my "opinion" or what I "remember"...this is published information, available to all, recorded at the time it happened. If anyone else has the numbers that Marvel has/had, please, by all means, share them. If anyone else has Diamond's numbers, please, by all means, share them. If anyone has ANY official numbers, please, by all means, share them. But until anyone does, we can only make reasonable estimates, based on the information we do have. And I seriously doubt that Marvel or Diamond's (or anyone else's for that matter) will show anything substantially different.

Please stop discussing me. There are plenty of other things to talk about. Thanks.

Not correct.

Thanks for posting the link, rjrjr. An aside to keep in mind...BIP calls them "Diamond", not to be confused with Diamond Distribution, which didn't begin operations until 1982.

You're comparing 2013-2014 internet sales to price guides of 1990....? That's an interesting perspective......... You miss the point, or dont care to acknowlege it. What I am saying is ( I think you already get it, but you just like being... you. So I will clarify for others ) If you cannot have the discussion without making personal comments, I will have to forego the discussion, which is unfortunate, because I was enjoying the debate. Regarding the discussion: you're comparing apples and orangutans. There is absolutely no comparison to how books came and went back then, for all the various reasons I have outlined, to how they do it now, and I will just leave it at that. You have also invented statements, and attributed them to me, when I clearly said something entirely different. That's dishonest. I fail to understand why people cannot disagree and discuss something without getting their emotions involved and making it personal. There is absolutely no need to take personal shots at others, simply because they don't agree with you, or you think they're being obtuse, or they just don't seem to "get it" the way you do, and no matter how "innocent" you think those shots may seem to you. I suppose it's because I lack the perspective you suggest I get. Take care.

I didn't delete it. It was simply too wordy for my taste after I posted it. And the point wasn't about whether one person (or thousands of people) bought an X-Men comic because of the 2000 movie. The point is, it did not help the values of back issues at all. It was like a totally separate universe. Maybe a blip here and there. Comics and films simply weren't tied into each other, yet, not anything like they are now. And 2000 was quite possibly the worst year for comics, new OR back issues, in the entire history of the industry. However, since you have seen the previous post, I will repost it: I have those CVMs, somewhere. Man, was that mag a wreck. Remember when Flash the TV series premiered in the fall of 1990? All of a sudden, Flash #1 (1987) was a $30 book! Jumping back a few pages... I am trying to figure out why this is so hilarous to you RMA. Because it was 1990. If that doesn't explain it...in 1990, films about superheroes were very scarce (think Batman....and four Supermans....and....that's it.) TV shows about superheroes were even scarcer. So, this whole "OMG, BUY IT NOW, THERE'S A TV SHOW/MOVIE/YOUTUBE PODCAST COMING OUT!!!!" thing was unheard of. It did not exist. The release of the X-Men in 2000 did not help X-Men books *at all*. The release of Spiderman in 2002 helped Spidey books *marginally*. Now, however, even hints of "the next thing to hit the airwaves", and everyone immediately rushes out to cash in. This was not the case in 1990. No they weren't. CVM didn't do any research. This was long before the internet. What were they going to do, go to the 2-3 national cons that were being held? No, because they weren't in the fall. So where did they get this information from? Hint: they made it up. They had a few dealers that they had on speed dial, and called them to find out what they were currently pushing at their stores. They then read the latest issues of CBG and the Overstreet Update, and then just made it up from there. You have to understand that Overstreet and the upstart price guides like CVM and Wizard DICTATED the market much more than they reported it. The books that Overstreet didn't have...? They were depressed in the price guide until he obtained them, and then, suddenly, the next year, they went up substantially in price! Coincidence? This has been reported many times, from many dealers, who sold to Bob in the 70's. Now, by the late 80's/early 90's, at least Overstreet made a serious effort at pricing legitimacy, with their dealer surveys and market reports...did CVM? Not at all. Was anyone paying $30 for a 3 year old, massively printed DC #1? Maybe in the highest priced New York/LA comic shops. It was certainly not the "average" (which is what a price guide is supposed to reflect.) In 1990, brand new comic books were $1, candy bars were 35 cents, a first class stamp was 25 cents, the median income was $29,000, and a gallon of gas was $1.32. $30 then is $53 now. Granted, there were more buyers...but the book had an average print run for a DC #1 from 1987 - 400-500k copies. Yes. And this is NOT what happened 24 years ago. Understand: the internet changed everything. Oh boy. In 1990, there were not "many large shows." Remember: the internet changed everything. Again: the internet changed *EVERYTHING.* The "only" difference....? It changed EVERYTHING. CVM was what Wizard hoped to be, and Overstreet on steroids. It was absurd/stupid/crazy/and insane, and everyone (including dealers) knew it. Thankfully, there WAS the Overstreet Update to counter it, or otherwise a lot of dealers would have made a lot less money. Unfortunately, as collectors prior to the internet know, price guide WAS the price, like it or not. There simply was no other mechanism by which the buying public and dealers had by which to price their backstock. No eBay. No internet. There were stores and shows, and not very many shows (in 1990, there was Wondercon, San Diego....New York...maybe Mid-Ohio?) The very first "local" show I went to was 45 miles away on the SF Peninsula, in South San Fran, at a hotel just outside the airport. I'll ignore the suggestion to "get some perspective" and simply point out that many of us have not only experience to draw from (which can be, admittedly, faulty at times), but we also have the surviving record in the form of said magazines, which gives us much of the perspective that is necessary. There was only a single shop in the Bay Area that I shopped at from that time period that dared to use CVM, and he was a hole in the wall in Pleasanton who sat around with the same unsold stock for years. Everyone else...and there were dozens...used Overstreet. Every single one. Because while it would have been nice to get the $24 per book that Amazing Spiderman #313 was priced at in CVM, dealers understood that the $10 it was priced at in Overstreet was far more likely to actually sell. Repeat ad infinitum. Should we discuss CVM's values for key silver age books vs. reported sales for the time period....? Would that demonstrate how silly they were....?

You're comparing 2013-2014 internet sales to price guides of 1990....? That's an interesting perspective.........

I have those CVMs, somewhere. Man, was that mag a wreck. Remember when Flash the TV series premiered in the fall of 1990? All of a sudden, Flash #1 (1987) was a $30 book! Jumping back a few pages... I am trying to figure out why this is so hilarous to you RMA. Because it was 1990. The internet changed *everything.* I can elaborate, if you'd like.

You guys realize that it ALL comes down to how an artist renders a human face, right...? Whether you love it, hate it, or are blah about it, the way an artist renders the human face always determines how much (or how little) you enjoy their art. Everything else is just window dressing.

I understand that, in Hollywood parlance, "cameo" refers to a KNOWN character/actor. But that doesn't rule out the use of the word to refer to characters who then became integral to the show. Lost used this device, as did Heroes. And, in comics, it has become the standard definition.

I loved Jim Lee's art then, and I love it now.

Incorrect. A cameo can NEVER be a 1st appearance because the term 'cameo' refers to an appearance of a KNOWN character. A character that has NEVER appeared before cannot make a cameo. I do not agree with this, and I'm fairly certain the majority of the hobby doesn't, either. A cameo is a short appearance within the context of a story, whether that story is in a movie, a TV show, a comic book, or any other sequential artform. It doesn't have to be a "known" character.

Late to the party, but that's correct...they are not reprints, and never were. They were printed at the exact same time as the regular newsstand versions. I have a question. I've been re-reading the Whitman article in the 2001 CBM. They refer to the big diamond/blank UPC Marvels as reprints. Of course, as you pointed out, now we understand that's not the case. Thing is, the same article refers to pre-1980 no-number Whitmans as reprints of their Gold Key counterparts. Is that still the correct understanding? Or has there been a change in understanding on that as well? That, I don't know (yet.) As Bellrules pointed out, the ads are different on some. That doesn't necessarily mean reprint, but it makes a very strong case for it. The thing with Whitman was, as Western, they were Gold Key and Whitman, so there were no rights issues involved, and they were the publisher, and could print and reprint at will. But with the Marvels and DCs, Western simply bought the books as part of the new Direct market program that Phil Seuling had convinced the Big Two to try in the early/mid 70's, so they could make and sell three packs. So, while they had the right to print Gold Keys/Whitmans at any time they wanted, they merely acted as a distributor for the Marvels and DCs, with no rights to print at will (and, indeed, no mechanism to do so....Sparta would have to get an order from the appropriate persons at Marvel/DC for such a reprinting to take place.) In this case, it will probably have to take the same type of reconstruction that the Marvels and DCs did, though there probably isn't the drive to do it as much. If anyone has or has done any scholarship on the issue, it would be much appreciated.

This is true, but I suspect it has been offset by the tons of copies (of #98) that sat in stock for the two decades. I bought 15 (I bought every issue of New Mutants #93-up @ 15 copies ea.) copies, and they sat in my box untouched for 18-19 years. I slabbed them all 9.8. While sure, it was a dollar box book, there were still vast quantities sitting in back stock not getting damaged. The same is true of #99, #100, #97, etc.

What some will never admit is that by NM 100, of course it was on fire. Why do you think X-Force #1 sold so many copies (or at least printed so many copies)? To say the Liefeld-Cable 'magic' of the time didn't cause all that excitement would be dismissing reality. Good thing I didn't say that then, huh...? Please don't engage me, Bosco. It is much better when you and I don't interact. Thanks. You had no problem with that in the General Sales thread. So don't try and play the victim now. New Mutants was hot at the end of that run, leading into X-Force #1 becoming the production nightmare it turned into. There is no arguing that fact. Please don't attempt to engage me, Bosco. It is much better when you and I don't interact. Thanks. Totally agree. Just be consistent with following your own advice. Thanks. Third time - Please don't attempt to engage me, Bosco. It is much better when you and I don't interact. Thanks.

Ehhhh...I dunno. Just as Cable was immensely popular, far, far more popular than any of the other characters Liefeld created in New Mutants, including Deadpool, it could happen again. It would only take the right ingredients. The truth is, the population of New Mutants #87 IS quite a bit less than #98, and Deadpool is a comedian. So far, comedians have not proved to be as long lasting in popularity as their serious counterparts. Don't get me wrong, it's no contest at the moment....but Deadpool's crazy popularity has only been from the last 6 years or so. If someone were to come along and do something with Cable that blew everyone away...like Miller did with Batman...then it could change that status.

What some will never admit is that by NM 100, of course it was on fire. Why do you think X-Force #1 sold so many copies (or at least printed so many copies)? To say the Liefeld-Cable 'magic' of the time didn't cause all that excitement would be dismissing reality. Good thing I didn't say that then, huh...? Please don't engage me, Bosco. It is much better when you and I don't interact. Thanks. You had no problem with that in the General Sales thread. So don't try and play the victim now. New Mutants was hot at the end of that run, leading into X-Force #1 becoming the production nightmare it turned into. There is no arguing that fact. Please don't attempt to engage me, Bosco. It is much better when you and I don't interact. Thanks.

What some will never admit is that by NM 100, of course it was on fire. Why do you think X-Force #1 sold so many copies (or at least printed so many copies)? To say the Liefeld-Cable 'magic' of the time didn't cause all that excitement would be dismissing reality. Please don't attempt to engage me, Bosco. It is much better when you and I don't interact. Thanks.

What some people don't seem to understand, or are unwilling to accept, is that while New Mutants was being published, the book was never "on fire." That includes all the way up to #100, which saw X-Men type numbers, but had a lot going for it. What really turned things up was 1. New Mutants was cancelled, and the wait in between #100 and X-Force #1 only fueled demand, much like the wait between Spidey #328 and Spiderman #1 had the year before and 2. X-Force itself. When that appeared, it was the best selling "modern" of all time (for two months, anyways!), and it created a FRENZY of demand for the New Mutants. You could still buy most of the Liefeld New Mutants for a buck or two over cover...until X-Force #1 came out in June, and then it was forget it. They were all $10-$30 books, with #87 leading the way at about $60-$70 (though some were getting $100 for it!) #88 was $30 in the OPG Update. Hot hot hot hot hot, all that fall and winter. In fact, it took Valiant in the summer of 1992 to really put the brakes on New Mutants and Cable. I have little doubt that the most sought after back issues on the market in the fall and winter of 1991/92 were New Mutants, especially #87. But 1990, and up until #100....? Not so much. A decent simmer, but that was about it.

Because Lefield was hot (read any OS from the time), Cable was hot, and people were hoping one of these would be "the next Cable". And in case you didn't know, NM 87 was a key issue a year or so after publication. Smoke that crackhead. STFU you blowhard. ah the beginning of the end of this thread...I think we've all learned a lot and now we all finally know that we should invest in NM 87 AND NM 98. Ick. I would never invest in NM #98. I don't see anywhere near the potential that I do #87. I may be wrong, but I just don't see #98 gaining substantially in value in the short term...and long term, who knows, once comics stop being printed.

Because Lefield was hot (read any OS from the time), Cable was hot, and people were hoping one of these would be "the next Cable". Really...? While it is true that Liefeld was hot (to an extent), and Cable was hot (to an extent), I'd sure like to know who those people were who "were hoping one of these would be 'the next Cable'" when the first Cable was only a $5-$10 book at this time (Dec of 1990.) This is very true....but just what does "key" mean? A "year or so after" publication was the same time as NM #99. #87 was a $5-$10 book at this time. A year LATER, after X-Force had been published 4-5 months, the book was $60, true. But that was two years after #87, and almost a year after it was second printed.

Maybe Lobo mini series?? Very close, but he'd been replaced by this time. Lobo #1 was the hit of early Fall. Batman 442? Getting VERY warm...but no. I was a year off. Was it Robin #1? DING DING DING!! We have a

So you are saying that with NM 96, which is stated to have a print run of 316K, a *later* issue with 3 major first appearances, sold LESS? What are you drinking tonight and where can I get some. Ummm, speaking of substance abuse, I want what you're smoking to say that those first appearances - throwaway Liefeld characters at the time - mattered a good godd*mn to anyone at the time. First appearances aren't "major" without the benefit of 20 years of hindsight ahhh I see RMA stole my point. I didn't know it was yours. I promise I'll give it back when I'm done with it. It'll still be good as new!

Maybe Lobo mini series?? Very close, but he'd been replaced by this time. Lobo #1 was the hit of early Fall. Batman 442? Getting VERY warm...but no.