RockMyAmadeus

FALSE!!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/181294944457 "And Sunflower too!"

By the way...is there anyone left who doesn't think this board wields tremendous influence on market trends? After not having any copies for years...years!...there are now EIGHT copies of Supergirl #1 3rd print up for sale... ...half of those from MCS. Granted, the market for such things is very, very small, and once I get my ONE high grade copy, and maybe 2-3 other guys, the rest will languish as they are overpriced, but still....EIGHT copies...plus the one I bought. Amazing.

Be careful...I bought another one from this seller, advertised as "NM-", and the back cover has a 1.5" color breaking crease and is moderately scuffed. Combined with the front cover damage, it's a 7.0/7.5 at CGC, not the 9.2 advertised. I suspect this copy is a nice 8.0 masquerading as a 9.4. I was happy to get one, but not at $60 for a 7.0/7.5.

Huh. I have a million Avengers 181s.

Just tonight. From TopNotch on eBay. Just happened to see it and was like, "Oh hello...." [click click tappity tap....and pay!] Ya, I've been eyeing it myself, going back and forth if I should buy it or not. Thankfully you made the decision for me. I think I'll stick to trying to complete my MM proper collection in 9.8. My White wales are #16 and #23 in 9.8. Glad to oblige! I've been tempted to try cobbling together a 9.8 set of MM proper myself. But to now had been satisfied enough with 15 and 24. Anyway, that will be quite the set for you once complete. Hell, it already is even with the two issues remaining! Any body have any ideas on how much I should be prepared to fork over for 9.8's of 16 and 23? I'm guessing at least $500 for 23.

What's worthy of mod attention? Judging by the threads he visits, maybe he wants us to get back to telling him which books to find to flip. Well, we can't all come on a comic book forum to talk about TV shows.

Get off my well-manicured lawn, you!!

The real problem with making "ages", especially that are so short in length, is that it ultimately confuses people. "Bronze Age" wasn't even a term used by anyone until the very, very late 80's. Now, we have 6 or 7 different "ages" that are based on....what? Granted, there were some pretty spectacular things that happened, but did they completely change the way things were done, or were they just more of the same? The argument for the Golden Age is pretty solid: it had never been done before, and it was immense. It changed pop culture. The Silver Age....sure, it was *almost* as impactful, and introduced long term pop culture icons. But there's debate about where it started, *and*...it wasn't like the GA, in that it took what had gone before, and...brilliantly, for sure...altered it in a way that connected with the public. But the Golden Age was all new. But the Bronze Age? Conan? Green Lantern #76? Conan existed in pop culture for decades already. And while GL/GA was pretty novel for comics, the fact is, comics was behind the curve on "social issues." And then the Copper Age....what is the pop culture influence of the Copper Age? What's THE defining moment of the Copper Age? Ask your non-comics friends who are the most important super heroes of all time, and they'll say Superman (Golden Age), Batman (Golden Age), and Spiderman (Silver Age.) *Maybe* someone might mention Wolverine. Maybe. But he still pales compared to the top 3. And nothing for the Copper Age. That we have these endless discussions about what starts where, and what ends where, with very little consensus really defines the issue: making up endless "age" names for "ages" that no one can even get 5 people to agree with... Maybe it's finally time to just keep what we have, and retire the "ages" forever.

There was a real problem, 4-5 years ago, before eBay added the "Copper Age" (really, we could just call them 70's, 80's, 90's...it would be so much easier...at least until they roll around again...), when the "Modern Age" encompassed everything from 1980-2008 or so. It was unwieldy, and a major pain. I'm glad they finally did something.

Really? I think I throw away my copy after reading it or maybe I did not even purchased it. This speaks lengths on how Marvel ruined itself for a short-term gain The movies are obviously another product. I dont care at all about them, but they are aimed to a generic public, and I wonder who will remember them. ' I hope the movies are such that kids will remember them when they grow up. I know my friends and I quote lines all the time from movies that made an impact on us: Godfather, Back to the Future, Star Wars, Ghostbusters...the list is pretty long. The superhero movies I've seen in the 2000's...X-Men 1 and 2, Spiderman 3, Iron Man 3...all very forgettable. No substance at all. I guess we'll see in 30 years.

I'm not entirely sure if it was a transformation of the industry as much as it was a transformation of the marketplace - on this I agree with you 100%. I think the industry lagged behind until mid-2001 - there's a long period of just drek where sales were in the toilet from the late 1990s. Amazing having a print run of under 20,000, things like that. Yeah, I agree with that distinction. Consumers reacting instantly, while publishers and retailers were a lot slower on the uptake.

I'm surely tryin'....

You really have to be the craziest SOB I've ever interacted with, and you are personally the reason I stay away from the CGC Forums. You're one of these "got to be right 100% of the time" people that I walk across the street to avoid, and you *really* should see someone about this condition. Want hard, cold facts rather that your usual hyperbole? Spider-man 1 set a record for 1 issue comic sales, which was broken by X-Force 1, and then broken by X-men #1, the current record holder at 8 million copies. This is when mass, rampant, multi-cover speculation took off, and at only 2.5-3 million copies sold, Superman 75 doesn't even come close. Superman #75 actually sold a bit more than 4 million copies, and immediately went to 2nd, 3rd, and ultimately 4th printings. Spiderman #1 had a total print run, across all printings, of 2.5 million, with X-Force #1 being the same. Superman #75, across all printings, has the second highest print run of all time. (Edit: It had that distinction even without multiple printings...the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th only added to the count.) So I dunno about "doesn't even come close."

I'll buy you a clue - how you "view" yourself on here is definitely not how others view you, trust me on that. Oh, of that I have little doubt. I was a loudmouth, rude, snide, contemptuous jerk. It doesn't matter if I only responded to what I was getting, two wrongs never make a right, and I went wayyy overboard in response. It was the "they bring a knife, you bring a gun" theory of message board posting. I accept the fact that I made my bed, and have to lie in it. I earned it, I deserve it. No doubt about it. But, by the grace of God, I have (hopefully) tempered my comments here, and try not to return insult for insult. I hope that has made for a kinder, gentler, more patient RMA. Only everyone else can decide. I'm not going to insult you back, Joe. But...be prepared for a vigorous challenge should you post things which may not be precisely accurate. Can we get back to discussing Copper age intricacies?

You really have to be the craziest SOB I've ever interacted with, and you are personally the reason I stay away from the CGC Forums. You're one of these "got to be right 100% of the time" people that I walk across the street to avoid, and you *really* should see someone about this condition. Joe...why are you incapable of having a conversation without making it personal? Look, here's the deal: you are well known on this board for having a very contentious attitude. This is no secret. But I have no problem challenging you, because while on the one hand, you utterly dismiss "Modern" books: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Board=4&Number=7473206&Searchpage=1&Main=331477&Words=moderns+joe_collector&topic=0&Search=true#Post7473206 and: http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Board=4&Number=7473084&Searchpage=1&Main=331477&Words=moderns+joe_collector&topic=0&Search=true#Post7473084 ....you don't have a problem with talking about those "moderns"...the very things you constantly speak against...and getting the facts wrong. There's no shame in being wrong, Joe. But people come here for information, and when you're putting out information that isn't true, you need to expect to be challenged. I don't mind being challenged: it is an opportunity to learn. If you looked at it as an opportunity to learn, instead of a personal attack, Joe, you'd have a lot better time here. And since I took a near-complete break from posting anything except pictures and emoticons for two years on this board, I don't tend to believe you when you say I am one of those "has to be 100% right" guys, or that I am personally responsible for you staying away. Don't take it so personally, Joe. It's not personal. Really.

Do you even have the faintest clue what "multiple" means? Having, relating to, or consisting of more than one individual, element, part, or other component; MORE THEN ONE - talking to you is like talking to a little kid. Seriously. I wasn't aware there were lots of little kids who were able to write like a relatively intelligent adult with a college education.... Since we're picking nits: the word is "than", not "then"...which is an interesting mistake for you to make, since you just pasted it correctly the sentence prior... Joe...I know you like to focus on one little potential point of contention, and ignore the main point of the discussion when it doesn't suit you, but it's really disingenuous. Let's not make mountains out of molehills, and just focus on the overarching discussion. But for the sake of the argument, let's go with your definition of "multiple"...using your definition, multiple covers are a Copper invention. Man of Steel #1. Justice League #3. Firestorm #61. Legends of the Dark Knight #1. Critters #22. Amazing Spiderman Annual #21. Are you now suggesting that the Copper Age ended in 1986? 1987? 1988? 1989?

One more point: the internet. The internet existed, as everyone knows, before this, but it didn't become mainstream until 1995. The first "dot com" ads in the media were 1995, and that's also when eBay (then AuctionWeb, and frequented by no one) was founded (9/95.) That, as much as the collapse, is what fundamentally changed the comics industry. No longer were buyers beholden to retailers to obtain what they could not. Now, they could trade amongst themselves. People didn't have to take their collections and sell them for 5% of OPG. Now, they could sell them directly to others. And....by far, the most important effect the internet had: information became instantly accessible, not subject to the editorial whims of the media. Total transformation of the industry.

By the time Superman died, the Modern Age (speculation, chromium covers, artists as rock stars, multi-million sellers, multiple covers, Wizard speculation, etc.) was well underway. And it's truly bizarre that people think that one of the major speculative players in history, Valiant, was part of the Copper Age. Again...much of this isn't true. The first chromium comic came out the same day as Superman #75 - Bloodshot #1. And that was just a chromium card attached to the front cover. The first all chromium cover didn't come out for 6 or more months later (I'm going with X-O #0, but anyone feel free to correct me.) And when Superman #75 came out, there were only two comics...not titles, single comics...that had come out with "multiple covers" (that is, more than 2)...and that was Legends of the Dark Knight #1 (4) and X-Men #1. (5) Spiderman #1 only had two covers. X-Force #1 only had one (not considering second printings, because those weren't part of the original marketing scheme.) "But, what about Spiderman #1 Platinum!!" - Spiderman #1 Plat was NOT available to anyone except retailers, and they only got one. It's hardly a "marketing program" when you give a single copy away to retailers as a thank you. Valiant was a "major speculative player"....? Again, not true. The very reason why Valiant became such a big deal is precisely BECAUSE no one speculated in it....with the possible exception of Greg Buls.....at FIRST. You know, Harbinger #1 with a print run of 48,000 copies, in an era when X-Men was selling a million+? Hardly anyone talked about Valiant until Unity....a year+ AFTER Magnus #1, and after Valiant had already published 45 or so books already. That's why Pre-Unity is still so valued today (what regular issue of X-Men sells for $300+ in 9.8 from those years? Spiderman?) Did Valiant drive the variant madness? Yes, of course...but not until LATER. By the time Superman #75 came out, there had only been 6 variants *total* published by Valiant - A&A #0 Gold, Eternal Warrior #1 Gold, Unity #0 Red, Unity #1 Gold & Platinum, and Hard Corps #1 Gold. That's fewer variants than Secret Invasion #1 alone had. And again, these books were simply not available to the consumer; they couldn't buy them "off the rack"...they had to find them, and then hope that a retailer would be willing to sell them. Hard to speculate on stuff you can't buy. And variants are a completely Copper Age invention (Man of Steel #1, Justice League #3, Firestorm #61, several independents like Critters #22, etc,) Wizard nearly went out of business in their first year. The issue that turned them around, which Gareb Shamus has talked about many times? The Youngblood/Cable covered #10. No one took Wizard seriously its first year...it took the symbiosis of Unity (that is, summer of 1992) and the ramp up on Valiant (again, POST-Unity), combined with the advent of Image to really make Wizard work. Rewriting history may be fun, but it's not much use to those looking for actual information. And the contention that there was something substantively different with "rock star artists, multi-million sellers, speculation" from what had been already going on for the past decade (Alpha Flight, anyone? Byrne? McFarlane? Simonson? Thor #337? Spidey #252? Man of Steel {which toppled Marvel's dominance of the market for the first time in 15 years}...? Miller? Dark Knight? Legends of the Dark Knight?) It was "Copper", just "Copper" to its ridiculous extremes. I'm not making a case for anything precise. It really can't be done. Even the start of the Silver Age is debatable. But there wasn't anything that much different in the market from 1982-1992. It was more of the same, taken as far as the publishers thought the public would take it...then jusssst a little further. The REAL substantive change to the industry didn't come with the death of Superman, or even the madness that was 1993. It came when the whole house of cards collapsed in 1995-1996, nearly forcing Marvel Comics out of publication, 70% of the existing Diamond accounts evaporating...THAT was the real change to the "Modern Age"...and that happened in the mid-90s, not the early.

I ran a newsstand for 3 years, and we never got our issues 2-3 weeks later. This was early to mid 1990s. I even remember getting the Superman #75 newsstand edition and selling a couple for $100 or so they day after they came out. :shrug: -slym From 1990-1993, I picked up several hot books (from Superman #50, Robin #1, to Bats #492, Tec #659) from the newsstand, because they arrived weeks...not days, but weeks...afterwards. I haunted the newsstands. Don't know what to tell you. Probably yet another distribution quirk of the era.

You mean Nov 20, 1992. Not on the East Coast. We've had this discussion. Ad nauseum. Oh, lighten up, Francis. You know I'm just screwing with you.

You mean Nov 20, 1992. No. November 18, 1992. I remember that day well. Hal, the owner of The Bookie had the armband on... I got my single allowed copy and promptly found a newsstand copy at Shop Rite... RIP Copper Age No, Nov 20, 1992. That's the official "on the street" day according to DC. But how did you find a newsstand copy at Shop Rite, when newsstands always came out 2-3 weeks after the DM....?

You mean Nov 20, 1992.

But he didn't die. It was all just a lie to get us to keep buying books. That seems a more "Modern" approach than"Copper". Nobody stayed dead from the Copper Age....

Once Liefeld Mania really took off, New Mutants was the best-selling book on the rack. People tend to forget that, and it's why I always liked NM 87 compared to 90-100, as this issue was before the rush, and had a much lower print run due to NM selling badly, Liefeld being an unknown and Cable really catching everyone by surprise. This is essentially not true. New Mutants #87 did not have a substantially lower print run than #86-94. #95-97 had about a 50% higher print run because of X-Tinction, and then the print run went down a few percent for #98 and #99. #100 was the one and only issue that had a print run substantially higher than the rest, perhaps 500,000 copies totally. Cable didn't really "catch everyone by surprise"...it was a slow simmer from #87-#100. The entire run was completed before NM #87 was a $20 book. And at no time was New Mutants, in its entire run, ever "the best-selling title on the rack." There was a title called "Spiderman" that was selling 10 times what New Mutants did...and then there was a title called "X-Men"...just to name two. But yes, Liefeld was an unknown. This has all been explained multiple times on this board already. New Mutants #2 was the best-selling April 1983 cover-dated Marvel title according to Marvel Age #13. The title had a brief run at the (direct-sales, Marvel only) top. New Mutants #100 was the second best-selling Marvel title released during February 1991 according to Marvel Age #103. Spider-Man #9 was number one on the list. Thanks for the additional notes! Unfortunately for Marvel, they were dealing with a monster DC book at the time, which also happened to have "New" in the title... But if it were not for Spiderman, New Mutants would have (finally) been the best selling comic on the racks...for one month.