The four books of the future?

[action1kid]

I certainly think that having the Submariner on the Cover of MPFW would have helped it value as of todays pricing. Since it wasnt an actual newstand comicbook that my have somewhat hurt it too but is what created its rarity.

Have you ever seen the prototype cover that was never issued for Marvel Mystery # 2? The original cover art for it is in the 1991 Sothebys Catolog. It is a full color splash of the Submariner jumping right out at you.

Now that is a cover that would have made MPFW the mega star it deserves to be right up there with the top ten books[value wise speaking]

[Agent 007]

Here are my 2 of the 4 I can agree on:

 

Action #1

TEC #27

 

I think all the new movies (done right like Iron Man/Batman) will remake these pop icons for the new generation.

 

Captain America Comics #1

Showcase #22

JIM #83

 

 

[action1kid]

Except for the movie in 2006.Superman has been sucessful in every other avenue possible. Hes still tops.

[Mr. 10%]

Four books seem to me to be on the move. Primarily they seem to have dug themselves into the consciousness of a worldwide ordians:

 

I have to comment on this... "Ordians" instead of "audience"? How did you get that? That's actually kind of impressive, in a hooked-on-phonics kinda way.

 

I think Kirk fought the Ordians in the original Star Trek.

 

 

In-cre-dib-le: I am still getting bashed for spelling 'Ordianse' in stead of 'audiance'. No more posting (thumbs u

[action1kid]

I know the feeling but come back for more arse kickin.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I guarantee you...no value is added to Batman #1 for being Joker's 1st appearance. I promise you. I cannot emphasize this enough. No Joker, and the book is still worth what it's worth. The fact that it's Batman #1 trumps everything else, by a long shot

 

 

You're wrong!

 

What he said

 

Yeah, how can't the 1st appearance of arguably the all-time best comic villain not add value?

 

Because it's the first issue of the fourth longest running title in comics history, the second book dedicated solely to one character, and the first issue of the second most popular character in comics.

 

That's how.

 

Nobody buys Batman #1 because it's the first appearance of either Joker or Catwoman. No one. They buy it because it's Batman...let me repeat that, because that point keeps getting lost....Batman...#1.

 

People buy Amazing Spiderman #129 because it's the first appearance of the Punisher.

 

If the Punisher first appeared in Amazing Spiderman #1, besides being totally out of place, he would add nothng to the value of the book because it's Amazing Spiderman #1.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

Comparable example: Magneto's first appearance is in X-Men #1. If it had been in #4. The value of X-Men #1 is not based on Magneto's appearance. It is because it's X-Men #1. Had Magneto's first appearance been #4, that book would rival X-Men #1 like Avengers #4 rivals Avengers #1. But it's not.

 

...but thats apples to oranges. Batman 1 is NOT Batman first appearance.

XMen 1 IS the characters first appearance.

 

Not really. It's a granny smith apples to a golden delicious apples argument. Which makes my point even stronger. The first appearance of Magneto is entirely overpowered by the first appearance of the X-Men. No one buys X-Men #1 because it's the first appearance of Magneto. They buy it because it's X-Men #1.

 

you have to pick a similar comparison where a character first appeared somewhere else THEN got their own book, AND in that #1 was the first appearance of a major villain.

 

No, I don't. The argument actually is better made by the X-Men/Magneto situation. The fact is, the situation that existed with Supes and Bats is fairly unique in comics history. A character first appears in an anthology title, and then, because he is so popular, he gets his own title within a year, while continuing to be published in that original anthology title.

 

It cetainly happened to other characters, but those instances are confined mostly to the very early Golden Age (Supes, Bats, Big Red Cheese, Torch and Subby.)

 

there may not be a comparable situation... but your analogy falls a bit short.

 

As noted before, the analogy actually works better for the X-Men/Magneto situation.

 

IMO, I always viewed Batman 1 and a number one. I think it obscures Joker and Catwomans first appearances... and even more than in cases where the character does not make the cover . But over the years I have heard many many opinions that Batman 1s value is in large part due to Joker and Catwoman.

 

And those people saying that are full of rubbish.

 

Who first appeared in Captain America #1 besides Cap?

 

Who first appeared in Submariner Comics #1?

 

Who first appeared in Amazing Spiderman #1?

 

Who first appeared in Captain Marvel Adventures #1?

 

Who first appeared in SUPERMAN #1?

 

It's nonsense. The book's value is because it's BATMAN NUMBER ONE. ANY OTHER BOOK...'Tec #40, Bats #4, More Fun #63, whatever...any other book, and you'd be correct. But not Bats #1.

 

(thumbs u

[showcase22gr1959]

My four books for the future:

 

Action Comics 1

Detective 27

Amazing Fantasy 15

Showcase 22

 

Four GA books for the future:

Action Comics 1

Detective 27

Superman 1

Batman 1

 

Four SA books for the future:

Amazing Fantasy 15

Showcase 22

X-men 1

Brave and the Bold 28

[damonwad]

Comparable example: Magneto's first appearance is in X-Men #1. If it had been in #4. The value of X-Men #1 is not based on Magneto's appearance. It is because it's X-Men #1. Had Magneto's first appearance been #4, that book would rival X-Men #1 like Avengers #4 rivals Avengers #1. But it's not.

 

...but thats apples to oranges. Batman 1 is NOT Batman first appearance.

XMen 1 IS the characters first appearance.

 

Not really. It's a granny smith apples to a golden delicious apples argument. Which makes my point even stronger. The first appearance of Magneto is entirely overpowered by the first appearance of the X-Men. No one buys X-Men #1 because it's the first appearance of Magneto. They buy it because it's X-Men #1.

 

you have to pick a similar comparison where a character first appeared somewhere else THEN got their own book, AND in that #1 was the first appearance of a major villain.

 

No, I don't. The argument actually is better made by the X-Men/Magneto situation. The fact is, the situation that existed with Supes and Bats is fairly unique in comics history. A character first appears in an anthology title, and then, because he is so popular, he gets his own title within a year, while continuing to be published in that original anthology title.

 

It cetainly happened to other characters, but those instances are confined mostly to the very early Golden Age (Supes, Bats, Big Red Cheese, Torch and Subby.)

 

there may not be a comparable situation... but your analogy falls a bit short.

 

As noted before, the analogy actually works better for the X-Men/Magneto situation.

 

IMO, I always viewed Batman 1 and a number one. I think it obscures Joker and Catwomans first appearances... and even more than in cases where the character does not make the cover . But over the years I have heard many many opinions that Batman 1s value is in large part due to Joker and Catwoman.

 

And those people saying that are full of rubbish.

 

Who first appeared in Captain America #1 besides Cap?

 

Who first appeared in Submariner Comics #1?

 

Who first appeared in Amazing Spiderman #1?

 

Who first appeared in Captain Marvel Adventures #1?

 

Who first appeared in SUPERMAN #1?

 

It's nonsense. The book's value is because it's BATMAN NUMBER ONE. ANY OTHER BOOK...'Tec #40, Bats #4, More Fun #63, whatever...any other book, and you'd be correct. But not Bats #1.

 

(thumbs u

So you're saying The Joker and Catwoman are the foundation that Batman #1 is built on right?

[bluechip]

I bought Amazing Spider-man #1 only because it was the first appearance of Jonah Jameson.

[Larryw7]

Nobody buys Batman #1 because it's the first appearance of either Joker or Catwoman. No one. They buy it because it's Batman...let me repeat that, because that point keeps getting lost....Batman...#1.

 

I don't think anyone is arguing that Batman #1 wouldn't be a big key book if it didn't include the first Joker/Catwoman, but it adds to the desirability. If Batman #1 were a collection of reprints from Detective, I don't think I'd want one as much. I certainly would rather have Batman #1 over Superman #1, and part of that reason is because it contains the first appearance of the greatest fictional villian of the 20th century.

[ComicConnoisseur]

Except for the movie in 2006.Superman has been sucessful in every other avenue possible. Hes still tops.

I actually looked up the Superman Returns box office, it did $391,081,192 worldwide compared to Wolverine who did Worldwide: $373,062,864 ,so maybe just maybe Superman still has some fastball left, it should be interesting to see how Batman does without Ledger and how Spidey does with a reboot. maybe things aren`t all doom n gloom for Supes as I thought with now Nolan in charge ?

[ComicConnoisseur]

]My four books for the future:[/b]

 

Action Comics 1

Detective 27

Amazing Fantasy 15

Showcase 22

 

Four GA books for the future:

Action Comics 1

Detective 27

Superman 1

Batman 1

 

Four SA books for the future:

Amazing Fantasy 15

Showcase 22

X-men 1

Brave and the Bold 28

what about four moderns of the future? that could be were the big money will be made.I am not talking bronze or copper either, books that have come out in the last 15 years.

Walking Dead # 1 day after day sells for at least $500 on Ebay, give me four moderns like that in the future and we can become very rich quick.

[showcase22gr1959]

My four books for the future:

 

Action Comics 1

Detective 27

Amazing Fantasy 15

Showcase 22

 

Four GA books for the future:

Action Comics 1

Detective 27

Superman 1

Batman 1

 

Four SA books for the future:

Amazing Fantasy 15

Showcase 22

X-men 1

Brave and the Bold 28

what about four moderns of the future? thats were the big money will be made.I am not talking bronze or copper either, books that have come out in the last 15 years.

Walking Dead # 1 day after day sells for at least $500 on Ebay, give me four moderns like that in the future and we can become very rich quick.

 

Sadly to say, "I'm not a modern comics collector/investor". My specialty is mainly before 1995. I stick to my knowledge and specialty. I sense some of the modern books (your definition of 15 years ago) with low print run may become GEMS for the future. Obliviously supply and demand will dictate any huge price movements in the future. The four books in the future in any of my categories will sustain above average growth for the long term 5-10 years. Nevertheless, most quality vintage comics had peaked and will be consolidating and remain stagnant for some 3-5 years just like the peak in early 1980's. (thumbs u

[RockMyAmadeus]

Nobody buys Batman #1 because it's the first appearance of either Joker or Catwoman. No one. They buy it because it's Batman...let me repeat that, because that point keeps getting lost....Batman...#1.

 

I don't think anyone is arguing that Batman #1 wouldn't be a big key book if it didn't include the first Joker/Catwoman,

 

I'm not saying they are, either.

 

but it adds to the desirability.

 

Of course it does. It's awesome.

 

But it doesn't add value. Bats #1 isn't worth what it is because of the Joker or Catwoman.

 

If Batman #1 were a collection of reprints from Detective, I don't think I'd want one as much. I certainly would rather have Batman #1 over Superman #1, and part of that reason is because it contains the first appearance of the greatest fictional villian of the 20th century.

 

That may be your reasoning, but it obviously isn't the reasoning of the market in general, as observed with Superman #1. By that reasoning, Bats #1 should be worth more than Supes #1....but it's not.

 

The simple truth is, "Batman" plus "#1" plus "1940" trumps everything else, by a wide, wide margin. The book could have had 16 pages, with Batman and Robin drawn as stick figures, and it would likely still be worth a fortune.

 

Ok, maybe not THAT extreme, but you see my point.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Comparable example: Magneto's first appearance is in X-Men #1. If it had been in #4. The value of X-Men #1 is not based on Magneto's appearance. It is because it's X-Men #1. Had Magneto's first appearance been #4, that book would rival X-Men #1 like Avengers #4 rivals Avengers #1. But it's not.

 

...but thats apples to oranges. Batman 1 is NOT Batman first appearance.

XMen 1 IS the characters first appearance.

 

Not really. It's a granny smith apples to a golden delicious apples argument. Which makes my point even stronger. The first appearance of Magneto is entirely overpowered by the first appearance of the X-Men. No one buys X-Men #1 because it's the first appearance of Magneto. They buy it because it's X-Men #1.

 

you have to pick a similar comparison where a character first appeared somewhere else THEN got their own book, AND in that #1 was the first appearance of a major villain.

 

No, I don't. The argument actually is better made by the X-Men/Magneto situation. The fact is, the situation that existed with Supes and Bats is fairly unique in comics history. A character first appears in an anthology title, and then, because he is so popular, he gets his own title within a year, while continuing to be published in that original anthology title.

 

It cetainly happened to other characters, but those instances are confined mostly to the very early Golden Age (Supes, Bats, Big Red Cheese, Torch and Subby.)

 

there may not be a comparable situation... but your analogy falls a bit short.

 

As noted before, the analogy actually works better for the X-Men/Magneto situation.

 

IMO, I always viewed Batman 1 and a number one. I think it obscures Joker and Catwomans first appearances... and even more than in cases where the character does not make the cover . But over the years I have heard many many opinions that Batman 1s value is in large part due to Joker and Catwoman.

 

And those people saying that are full of rubbish.

 

Who first appeared in Captain America #1 besides Cap?

 

Who first appeared in Submariner Comics #1?

 

Who first appeared in Amazing Spiderman #1?

 

Who first appeared in Captain Marvel Adventures #1?

 

Who first appeared in SUPERMAN #1?

 

It's nonsense. The book's value is because it's BATMAN NUMBER ONE. ANY OTHER BOOK...'Tec #40, Bats #4, More Fun #63, whatever...any other book, and you'd be correct. But not Bats #1.

 

(thumbs u

So you're saying The Joker and Catwoman are the foundation that Batman #1 is built on right?

 

Not even close.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

 

That which Batman is, is intrinsically linked (was that spelled right?) to what the Joker is.

 

No he's not.

 

What a wacky statement.

 

You cant split'em up talking about that:

 

"Batman is light years more important to comics than the Joker is".

 

You most certainly can.

 

Batman = A character who has carried not one, but TWO titles for 70 years, in addition to several other titles over the decades. A character who has been the title character in no less than 2,000 different comic books.

 

Joker = A character who has been the title character in a grand total of 20 different comics.

 

They are what they are in terms of the bond that ties them together in some thing that (sometimes mostly) look like a war (of love). So it Is exactly the greatness of what the Batman is - that makes the Joker so damn huge and important.

 

Sorry...that's just not correct.

 

If you want to measure them as isolated characters in terms of importance, you miss out on that inherent magnetism that constitutes them. They live through each other.

 

And now calculate (meditate) on you own what this argument translates into regarding the Bats#1 book and what it will be remembered for - and why ... Me think its easy. (thumbs u

 

That's because you have an inflated view of the Joker that is not merited by reality.

 

Batman #1 is "remembered" because it's Batman #1.

 

Look, I'm the last person to discount the importance of the Joker. He's definitely one of the greatest villains ever created, and arguably the greatest. Of his first 10 cover appearances in Batman, starting with #11, I have 7 (including #11, his first Batman cover.) Of the 13 Bat books I own between #9 and #73, 7 of them are Joker covers. So I get it...I love the Joker, too.

 

But to claim that "Batman lives through the Joker" is just a gross overstatement, and ignores 70+ years of history, including Detective #27-44!

 

The Joker NEEDS Batman to exist. The reverse is most certainly not true.

[Wayne-Tec]

To say that Joker's first appearence adds ZERO value to Batman #1 is a bit much; if that's the point you're trying to make.

 

But I see why you might feel that way. Given that Superman #1 has remained as valuable as it is despite not having a major introduction of that magnitude and the fact that Batman #1 hasn't exploded to "Superman #1 value" yet might be points to help support your argument.

 

But I think there are a few factors to consider.

 

Superman #1 is as valuable as it is for a few more reasons that it simply being a "#1". The fact that it is the first ever superhero solo-title is significant, the fact that it has that 1930's mystique might also play a factor, but also the fact that it is much more rare than Batman #1; especially unrestored.

 

I wouldn't be shocked if there were two copies of Batman #1 for every copy of Superman #1. I believe that if Batman #1 were as rare as Superman #1, came out a year earlier, and was the first superhero solo-title, it WOULD be worth more than Superman #1.

 

Those factors in Superman #1's favor keep it on a different level.

 

But how many owners of Batman #1 were motivated (in small or large part) to buy the issue because it was the first appearence of the most legendary villians of all-time?

 

I agree that the book would be beyond valuable even without those two first appearences; but to imply that their existence has NO effect on the value it saying a bit much in my opinion.

[Agent 007]

My four books for the future:

 

Action Comics 1

Detective 27

Amazing Fantasy 15

Showcase 22

 

Four GA books for the future:

Action Comics 1

Detective 27

Superman 1

Batman 1

 

Four SA books for the future:

Amazing Fantasy 15

Showcase 22

X-men 1

Brave and the Bold 28

 

100% right on BB28, way undervalued !!! Next book on my buy list

[showcase22gr1959]

My four books for the future:

 

Action Comics 1

Detective 27

Amazing Fantasy 15

Showcase 22

 

Four GA books for the future:

Action Comics 1

Detective 27

Superman 1

Batman 1

 

Four SA books for the future:

Amazing Fantasy 15

Showcase 22

X-men 1

Brave and the Bold 28

 

100% right on BB28, way undervalued !!! Next book on my buy list