Avengers #4 Extremely Undervalued because its a #4 not a #1

[James Howlett]

It's a key, no doubt...but as Mac Man said above, it's in the second tier of keys behind the big boys of the SA:

 

 

AF#15

FF#1

Hulk#1

TOS#39

JIM#83

 

Would you rate AV#4 above other second tier keys like Daredevil #1, Strange Tales #110, TTA#27?

Below all of them. Ive always wondered why people even care about 'first SA appearance of xxxxx'

 

then we can get into argument about Flash and GL they started in Golden age. We're talkin Silver Age relevance only.

 

Steve Rogers =Steve Rogers. Jay Garrick an Alan Scott are not the same as Barry and Hal.

[Mac Man]

I'm not disputing the relevancy of the book,hope to one day own an AV#4.As far as Iron Mans 1st app. relevancy and popularity are two different things,I'm good with the whole thing.Major keys,minor keys I want them all.

 

The foundation of my point though, is that until recently, for both relevancy and popularity, you would have rated Av. 4 ahead of TOS 39 in my opinion. The only thing I would have given the nod to TOS 39 on was scarcity, a factor that I think should not go into whether a book is "key" or not.

 

Just a point of clarification then, if you don't mind: Since supply is not a factor for a key book, then I'm assuming you would not necessarily equate a key book to a "blue chip" book (relegating key status to historical significance only and not to be used in a financial way then)?

 

Right. A "key" historically has always (as I explained above) is really about the event as it happens in context -- value follows that (i.e. demand for that particular book because of the significance of the event to comics, pop culture etc.). The reason why TOS 39 is suddenly more valuable is that IM is now more relevant to our culture, thus is fist appearance is more "key". 10 years ago, to me, IM is important, but not that popular OR all that important in the grand scheme of the Marvel U. Sure, he's a founding member and important, but not as important as Cap, Spidey, Hulk, or probably even Wolverine. Now, there's some alteration.

 

If supply was a factor, or a significant factor, then the most rare books would be the biggest keys. But most people don't really care about Double Action 2, it's just a rare cool book, not a key.

 

Well, in the grand scheme of things, I don't think we're too far off from one another re: our views on this book--especially if you take a gander at my rationale for why ASM 1 is a top tier SA key. Exact same frame of logic. For me, I do believe value and supply factor into a book being a key but if I were to simply look at it without that monetary (not demand, just monetary) value factored in, then by my own definitions of keys books, A4 would naturally be bumped up.

 

But as I tell my students, an A- is still in the A range and not all that different from a solid A.

 

(thumbs u

 

I guess for me, tying value and supply in puts the cart before the horse (Action 1 and Tec 27 are the biggest keys and happen to be the toughest books) -- but it suddenly dawned on people that Batman 1 had the Joker's first appearance. I remember when Metro had like 8 Bat 1s on their wall in the 2000s -- and the reason it suddenly shot up in value and relative scarcity was because people suddenly wanted it -- for that first appearance, not just because it was a Bat 1. Bat 1 isn't considered (relatively speaking) to be a "rare" book, but by any standards a huge key.

 

I realize I'm arguing a lot of semantics. I'm only doing so because "keys" need to first have the parameters defined. I think that here on the boards, people analyze key tied into value and scarcity, but the general reading population I think concerns itself more with what happens in the book.

 

Whether Avengers 4 is an A- or an A probably is just a matter of splitting hairs either way, but I believe in fighting even the little battles for my boy Cap.

 

I'm an English teacher--semantics counts. We have a mildly different measure of the term, but in the grand scheme of things, we're not arguing too much (thumbs u

 

Supply has its role. TMNT #1 case in point. With a print run of only 3,000 and many restored and some presumably lost/destroyed, the number of unrestored is obviously lower than the print run. I think many will agree that supply factors in heavily to the prices this book earns despite being "younger" than many other key books.

 

On the other hand, AF 15 is a relatively accessible book in terms of supply but it's also THE Silver Age Marvel book. So, in this case, supply does not factor in as heavily as other factors.

 

Here's what I'd say (in no particular order):

 

1. Historical Significance (effects in canon continuity, etc)

2. First Appearance

3. Supply

4. Demand

5. Market Value

6. Aesthetics

7. Longevity

 

These are the six factors that I consider when trying to determine how significant a particular book is in the bigger picture. The higher a book rates in a greater number of said categories, the more this book is going to stand out amongst the rest. So clearly, a book like TMNT #1 would rank lower in longevity (being only 26 years old) but it is going to score exceptionally high in at least #s 1-5, and arguably #6 (if you like them ). AF 15 is score high in 1, 2, and 4-7 being only weak in #3. And then a gimme would be Action Comics #1 rating high in all 7 categories.

 

 

[Foolkiller]

I'd argue factors 3 and 5 are relevant after the book is already determined to be a key and go to value, not status. TMNT, even with a low print run, would still be a key if they printed a zillion of them -- the "value" may be different, but it's nature as a key would remain unchanged. It would have been licensed and still the 1st appearance. The event is what it is. The book may be more or less desirable, but the first appearance of a major character would still be a key, regardless of the monetary value.

 

First the book is a key. Demand is driven by the underlying nature that it is, in fact, a key. A key does not result because it is either valuable or there's low supply. Demand is a factor, because it's what gives credence to the event.

 

I'm not 100% sure what you mean by Aesthetics, but I'd rate longevity a little higher on the list of factors.

[Mac Man]

I'd argue factors 3 and 5 are relevant after the book is already determined to be a key and go to value, not status. TMNT, even with a low print run, would still be a key if they printed a zillion of them -- the "value" may be different, but it's nature as a key would remain unchanged. It would have been licensed and still the 1st appearance. The event is what it is. The book may be more or less desirable, but the first appearance of a major character would still be a key, regardless of the monetary value.

 

First the book is a key. Demand is driven by the underlying nature that it is, in fact, a key. A key does not result because it is either valuable or there's low supply. Demand is a factor, because it's what gives credence to the event.

 

I'm not 100% sure what you mean by Aesthetics, but I'd rate longevity a little higher on the list of factors.

 

Well, as I said, I listed those characteristics in no particular order so feel free to weight categories more than others. I do believe that in providing this framework, it does give us more substantial ground that we can evaluate though. The weight assigned to each category is going to vary marginally from person to person though.

 

And by aesthetics, I simply mean artistic appeal--often cover art in the age of slabbed books. Tec 31 is a wonderful example of a book whose increased demand is fueled in large part to the cover art (and by extension, Batman 227 for similar reasons). In that example, I would argue aesthetic appeal plays SIGNIFICANTLY into its status and value compared to some of the non-Batman covers from the Pre-Robin Tec run.

 

And here is another point to be careful of in fixating on historicity in comics: it isn't fixed. We all thought Green Goblin died in ASM 122, and its place as a key, per your definition, is defined that issues relation of those events.

 

And yet, those events were not what generations perceived them to be thanks to revisionism inherent in comics. The truth is no longer the truth and is only shown to be a perception. Therefore, the event is no longer the event but simply one "bump" in the narrative.

 

This is where current valuation and perception of the book comes into play. It isn't the only factor that plays into the overall status of the book but it does take into account current perception of the overall effect that issue has in the continuity of the series. Further, future storylines could suddenly validate old books that were never previously of worth, but only to later turn around and invalidate them. Some of this confusion happens when writers / editors start going "Dallas" on readers such as the One More Day, Crisis storylines, etc.

 

Sorry to go all postmodern there but I do think it is something worth considering when we become too attached to a historical event of the past as dictating present worth. It's a factor, but only one of many and things do change which means we need to take the present into account as well.

 

But obviously, I think you know I have a ton of respect for where you're coming from so while we might differ, you should know that I don't think that means your stance is anyway less valid than my own.

 

Ok, time for some shut eye!

[ComicConnoisseur]

My criteria is simple, its what of these four books will be easier to sell in three to five years for the most profit? Will it be Tos 39, JIM 83,Hulk 1 or Avengers 4? Hands down it will be TOS 39,According to the Disney stockbrokers Iron Man last year sold more merchandise than Spidey. So in conclusion TOS 39 is the winner and maybe someday will give AF 15 a run for its money. Iron Man is the perfect hero for the modern audience. He will adapt well while a lot of those others won`t.

[jjonahjameson1]

Yeah, but it was March of 64, so still not terribly long after the whole shabang.

 

 

It was long enough to make a significant in scarcity/availability!

 

Sorry, the text is failing me here. Are you saying it (Avengers 4) is more or less scarce than the big boys?

 

And FWIW, I do see this book moving up the rankings if the following Avengers movies are of the same caliber as the Iron Man films. In THAT event, we might see this books pick up some nice steam and even if they do settle back down, they'll end up higher than before.

 

Interestingly, ToS 39 is still going strong.

 

MUCH more common than the big boys

[jjonahjameson1]

I would put Avengers #1,AV #4,TTA #27,Strange Tales #110 and yes Amazing Spider-Man #1 as second tier books.Thoughts

 

ASM 1 is a 1st tier book without a doubt. What is your rationale for categorizing it as a 2nd tier book?

 

[ComicConnoisseur]

I'd argue factors 3 and 5 are relevant after the book is already determined to be a key and go to value, not status. TMNT, even with a low print run, would still be a key if they printed a zillion of them -- the "value" may be different, but it's nature as a key would remain unchanged. It would have been licensed and still the 1st appearance. The event is what it is. The book may be more or less desirable, but the first appearance of a major character would still be a key, regardless of the monetary value.

 

Definately agree with you there (thumbs u and actually explains why Incredible Hulk 181 is a key as well, there are thousands of them but its still a much sought after key.

[oakman29]

I would put Avengers #1,AV #4,TTA #27,Strange Tales #110 and yes Amazing Spider-Man #1 as second tier books.Thoughts

 

ASM 1 is a 1st tier book without a doubt. What is your rationale for categorizing it as a 2nd tier book?

Mac man changed my way of thinking with ASM 1,so I concede that yes it does belong in the top tier of books. (thumbs u

[Foolkiller]

I'd argue factors 3 and 5 are relevant after the book is already determined to be a key and go to value, not status. TMNT, even with a low print run, would still be a key if they printed a zillion of them -- the "value" may be different, but it's nature as a key would remain unchanged. It would have been licensed and still the 1st appearance. The event is what it is. The book may be more or less desirable, but the first appearance of a major character would still be a key, regardless of the monetary value.

 

First the book is a key. Demand is driven by the underlying nature that it is, in fact, a key. A key does not result because it is either valuable or there's low supply. Demand is a factor, because it's what gives credence to the event.

 

I'm not 100% sure what you mean by Aesthetics, but I'd rate longevity a little higher on the list of factors.

 

Well, as I said, I listed those characteristics in no particular order so feel free to weight categories more than others. I do believe that in providing this framework, it does give us more substantial ground that we can evaluate though. The weight assigned to each category is going to vary marginally from person to person though.

 

And by aesthetics, I simply mean artistic appeal--often cover art in the age of slabbed books. Tec 31 is a wonderful example of a book whose increased demand is fueled in large part to the cover art (and by extension, Batman 227 for similar reasons). In that example, I would argue aesthetic appeal plays SIGNIFICANTLY into its status and value compared to some of the non-Batman covers from the Pre-Robin Tec run.

 

And here is another point to be careful of in fixating on historicity in comics: it isn't fixed. We all thought Green Goblin died in ASM 122, and its place as a key, per your definition, is defined that issues relation of those events.

 

And yet, those events were not what generations perceived them to be thanks to revisionism inherent in comics. The truth is no longer the truth and is only shown to be a perception. Therefore, the event is no longer the event but simply one "bump" in the narrative.

 

This is where current valuation and perception of the book comes into play. It isn't the only factor that plays into the overall status of the book but it does take into account current perception of the overall effect that issue has in the continuity of the series. Further, future storylines could suddenly validate old books that were never previously of worth, but only to later turn around and invalidate them. Some of this confusion happens when writers / editors start going "Dallas" on readers such as the One More Day, Crisis storylines, etc.

 

Sorry to go all postmodern there but I do think it is something worth considering when we become too attached to a historical event of the past as dictating present worth. It's a factor, but only one of many and things do change which means we need to take the present into account as well.

 

But obviously, I think you know I have a ton of respect for where you're coming from so while we might differ, you should know that I don't think that means your stance is anyway less valid than my own.

 

Ok, time for some shut eye!

 

Yeah, I thought about the transitory nature of certain issues -- however... the reality is, once the event happens, it's marked forever as a key for that reason. You used ASM 122 where the Goblin "died" but it's still viewed as a key, no matter what revisionist history occurred afterwards.

 

In comics, the event is "frozen" in time. For many, many years, that issue was the "death" of the Goblin -- ASM 121 is still the death of Gwen Stacy. So the deaths remain important events (and hence why I agreed that longevity certainly was a category).

 

The "death" of Captain America certainly isn't viewed as a key, because in modern storylines, death doesn't have the same meaning. But again, I've argued that the events that are meaningful, in context, are what make them a key. And most certainly, revisionist history does not change the nature of what makes it a key or not.

[Foolkiller]

My criteria is simple, its what of these four books will be easier to sell in three to five years for the most profit? Will it be Tos 39, JIM 83,Hulk 1 or Avengers 4? Hands down it will be TOS 39,According to the Disney stockbrokers Iron Man last year sold more merchandise than Spidey. So in conclusion TOS 39 is the winner and maybe someday will give AF 15 a run for its money. Iron Man is the perfect hero for the modern audience. He will adapt well while a lot of those others won`t.

 

That's an investment strategy, and it's a personal determination of what makes a book a good pick up -- not necessarily a "key". I think it's an interesting point though, because I'm not sure TOS 39, despite debuting an incredibly popular character now, is ever going to catch up to the cache of owning AF 15. In terms of value -- I think the run up on the book has cooled, and in fact, TOS 39 is fairly obtainable these days in a respectable grade for a very reasonable cost. IM 2 did not cause a big run up in TOS 39 prices and I think the movie bump has come and gone for that book. It will rise slowly and steadily, but as a result of its status on its own.

[Mac Man]

My criteria is simple, its what of these four books will be easier to sell in three to five years for the most profit? Will it be Tos 39, JIM 83,Hulk 1 or Avengers 4? Hands down it will be TOS 39,According to the Disney stockbrokers Iron Man last year sold more merchandise than Spidey. So in conclusion TOS 39 is the winner and maybe someday will give AF 15 a run for its money. Iron Man is the perfect hero for the modern audience. He will adapt well while a lot of those others won`t.

 

That's a bit of a hasty conclusion... while I DO believe the Iron Man movies (and following Avengers films) will certainly solidify Iron Man as a top tier character now, I don't think it will be sufficient to move him past Spider-Man. Again, IM has had 2-3 years of being in the mainstream spotlight whereas Spidey has been swinging in pop culture's limelight for decades. It's like comparing Spider-Man to Superman...

[Mac Man]

I'd argue factors 3 and 5 are relevant after the book is already determined to be a key and go to value, not status. TMNT, even with a low print run, would still be a key if they printed a zillion of them -- the "value" may be different, but it's nature as a key would remain unchanged. It would have been licensed and still the 1st appearance. The event is what it is. The book may be more or less desirable, but the first appearance of a major character would still be a key, regardless of the monetary value.

 

First the book is a key. Demand is driven by the underlying nature that it is, in fact, a key. A key does not result because it is either valuable or there's low supply. Demand is a factor, because it's what gives credence to the event.

 

I'm not 100% sure what you mean by Aesthetics, but I'd rate longevity a little higher on the list of factors.

 

Well, as I said, I listed those characteristics in no particular order so feel free to weight categories more than others. I do believe that in providing this framework, it does give us more substantial ground that we can evaluate though. The weight assigned to each category is going to vary marginally from person to person though.

 

And by aesthetics, I simply mean artistic appeal--often cover art in the age of slabbed books. Tec 31 is a wonderful example of a book whose increased demand is fueled in large part to the cover art (and by extension, Batman 227 for similar reasons). In that example, I would argue aesthetic appeal plays SIGNIFICANTLY into its status and value compared to some of the non-Batman covers from the Pre-Robin Tec run.

 

And here is another point to be careful of in fixating on historicity in comics: it isn't fixed. We all thought Green Goblin died in ASM 122, and its place as a key, per your definition, is defined that issues relation of those events.

 

And yet, those events were not what generations perceived them to be thanks to revisionism inherent in comics. The truth is no longer the truth and is only shown to be a perception. Therefore, the event is no longer the event but simply one "bump" in the narrative.

 

This is where current valuation and perception of the book comes into play. It isn't the only factor that plays into the overall status of the book but it does take into account current perception of the overall effect that issue has in the continuity of the series. Further, future storylines could suddenly validate old books that were never previously of worth, but only to later turn around and invalidate them. Some of this confusion happens when writers / editors start going "Dallas" on readers such as the One More Day, Crisis storylines, etc.

 

Sorry to go all postmodern there but I do think it is something worth considering when we become too attached to a historical event of the past as dictating present worth. It's a factor, but only one of many and things do change which means we need to take the present into account as well.

 

But obviously, I think you know I have a ton of respect for where you're coming from so while we might differ, you should know that I don't think that means your stance is anyway less valid than my own.

 

Ok, time for some shut eye!

 

Yeah, I thought about the transitory nature of certain issues -- however... the reality is, once the event happens, it's marked forever as a key for that reason. You used ASM 122 where the Goblin "died" but it's still viewed as a key, no matter what revisionist history occurred afterwards.

 

In comics, the event is "frozen" in time. For many, many years, that issue was the "death" of the Goblin -- ASM 121 is still the death of Gwen Stacy. So the deaths remain important events (and hence why I agreed that longevity certainly was a category).

 

The "death" of Captain America certainly isn't viewed as a key, because in modern storylines, death doesn't have the same meaning. But again, I've argued that the events that are meaningful, in context, are what make them a key. And most certainly, revisionist history does not change the nature of what makes it a key or not.

 

For what it's worth, I think that's one of the more frustrating things about comics is lack of adherence to the history and past events--the key issues. I mean it makes sense in a way as I can see how more modern writers want to try and be more "cutting edge" through employing different postmodern/post-structural creative approaches to find new material, but is there really something wrong with sticking with the grand narrative of a character? Sure would make it easier some times.

 

And frankly, I think much of what we're talking about here would be well-applied to the MUCH-neglected SGT 13. Aside from having a simply gorgeous cover, it's obviously not a top tier key, but it IS a book I think that is left off of second tier key lists and frankly, adds a nice quality to the backstory of Cap in connecting him to the Marvel Age continuity--and I wouldn't be too terribly surprised if some elements from it are carried over into the next film.

[143ksk]

I don't know as Cap's popularity continues to grow I think Avengers #4 should get more respect as its really a landmark issue, bridging the GA to the new Marvel universe.

 

Thought FF#4 did that TOO.

Fixed that for you.

 

I can't believe no one's brought up ST #114...

[the blob]

I don't know as Cap's popularity continues to grow I think Avengers #4 should get more respect as its really a landmark issue, bridging the GA to the new Marvel universe.

 

This is what I feel as well. Could be wrong though...i've been wrong before

 

Except they had already done that with the Submariner a year or two before, no?

 

And criminey, $8-$10K for a 9.2 sounds like respect.

[Larryw7]

I don't know as Cap's popularity continues to grow I think Avengers #4 should get more respect as its really a landmark issue, bridging the GA to the new Marvel universe.

 

Thought FF#4 did that TOO.

Fixed that for you.

 

I can't believe no one's brought up ST #114...

 

 

I always wonder if that book will ever break out. If the movie doesn't do it, then it's never destined to be a "hot" book.

[Raphael]

I think something that needs to be noted as that in today's "Modern" continuity, Avengers #4 is just as essential to the "mordern" origin of Captain America. WIth the GA Cap #1, we get his origin and 1st appearance. Avengers #4 is the book that explains why he's around in todays age, so in my opinion, it's a deeply important issue for the character's origin and history.

 

That being said, I do not think that it can truly compare to the other 1st appearances of Iron Man, Thor, DareDevil and the like. I mean, it has been mentioned before, the true true 1st appearance of Cap in the Golden Age easily fetches more $$ than the other Silver Age 1st appearance keys. Also worth considering is the abundance of availability of copies in comparison. How many JIM# 83 or TOS #39 have gone for sale vs. sales of comparable graded books for GA Cap #1?

 

I think Avengers #4 is probably around the right value at the moment (it's certainly gone up ALOT since I purchased my copy 2 years ago.) It will probably go up even more when the Cap movie comes out, or when the Avengers movie comes out.

 

By the way, if someone wants to sell me a GA Cap #1, that's still on my Grail list!

[supapimp]

I don't know as Cap's popularity continues to grow I think Avengers #4 should get more respect as its really a landmark issue, bridging the GA to the new Marvel universe.

 

Thought FF#4 did that TOO.

Fixed that for you.

 

I can't believe no one's brought up ST #114...

 

i'd rather have that book in CGC 9.2 than a AV 4, it's HTF in HG.

[mysterio]

Ditto on the ST #114 over the Avengers #4. While I would like them both, the #114 is much harder in grade than the #4.

 

Fascinating conversation!

[Mac Man]

Honestly, while ST 114 uses the iconography of Captain America, it's the Acrobat--not Steve Rogers, so I don't see this book benefiting all that much from the movie hype. A good book to know and have for collectors due to its significance behind the scenes with Stan and Jack testing the waters, but not substantially enough to really elevate it any higher than a semi-key book.

 

(But I do like it and was happy to get a copy if that means anything )