• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Walking Dead FAQ's with answers

Started by maloney414,

198 posts in this topic

maloney414

maloney414

Posted
  • Author
Posted
nope

 

Well it should be.

 

-1

 

Nah, counting Previews magazine as a 1st appearance feels like cheating to me. 2c

 

If we did, it would take all the fun out of collecting 1st appearances because you'd know where 99% of all the 1st appearances will be beforehand.

 

To me, it's a thick magazine and not a comic. So the 1st comic book appearance is what matters. Just my opinion. 2c

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrWeen

MrWeen

Posted
Posted
nope

 

Well it should be.

 

-1

 

Nah, counting Previews magazine as a 1st appearance feels like cheating to me. 2c

 

If we did, it would take all the fun out of collecting 1st appearances because you'd know where 99% of all the 1st appearances will be beforehand.

 

To me, it's a thick magazine and not a comic. So the 1st comic book appearance is what matters. Just my opinion. 2c

 

Finally someone who presents a valid argument against. Well done sir. Th only problem is that technically this IS rick's first appearance in a publication ( as far as I know ) How can we tell? With our eyes of course! No matter what the market says or what people desire a first appearance to be, a first appearance is simply a black or white argument whether he/she/it appears in a comic book or on the back of a cracker jack box.

 

What about this one? And before all you Dead heads give me guff about this being a WD thread just try an realize I am only trying to determine what y'all think about it.... First Spider-Man Black Costume in print? Looks like it to me.

165037_4722613437066_1158061221_n_zpsf9754cb9.jpg

540815_4722613037056_254664044_n_zpsc7d8d675.jpg

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
alaskanwonder

alaskanwonder

Posted
Posted

$800-$1250ish on Ebay.

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/The-Walking-Dead-Dead-1-First-Printing-/181039019959?pt=US_Comic_Books&hash=item2a26c437b7

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/WALKING-DEAD-1-1st-Print-Near-Mint-Image-Kirkman-/200824863818?pt=US_Comic_Books&hash=item2ec2183c4a

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Walking-Dead-1-First-Print-Rare-Black-Label-VF-NM-AMC-TV-Kirkman-/321040605046?pt=US_Comic_Books&hash=item4abf82df76

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comicwiz

comicwiz

Posted
Posted

Thanks! I did the grading/appraisal before I saw your post.

 

I concluded his was a VF+/VF/NM (8.5/9.0) and gave a $700-$800 value range.

 

It was a nice book that could have hit 9.4 (probably even a 9.6 with a press) if not for a tiny 0.5 cm in diameter speck of colour fleck on the front cover and some tiny spots near the titling that brought it down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stumptown

Stumptown

Posted
Posted

Hey Maloney, let me add in waaaay late congrats and thanks on doing this thread.

 

Has your allowable editing time on your original post timed out or have you just not gotten around to plugging in WW WD#1 variants? I think it's up to 5 covers now plus that "new" color version of #1 coming out soon too plus any other Wizard Worlds coming later this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ranx

ranx

Posted
Posted

This was the rehash of an old thread....

 

So let me talk again about Agents #6 Capes #1

 

I think what is missing is that the author is not working with image, is something of an expert, but not infallible...

 

So the idea that when diamond decides to ship an item determines who has the first appearance seems false.. I am talking about his declaration that agents #6 and Capes #1 is not before walking dead #1. They have earlier publication dates...That matters more to me then when the comic book hit the shelves in his part of the world...

 

Diamond is a near monopoly, but they aren't the only distributor in the world. Telling me when THEY shipped the comic is not proof of which one(s) where first...

 

If there is no smoking gun of proof.

I submit:

-Earlier publication date. Walking dead says October on the cover, Agents 6 and Capes 1 says Sept. For most collectables this is enough. ( oh and the date on the inside is the same as well )

 

-That it was a preview, intended to go before Walking Dead 1 as advertisement..

 

-I linked an article where they talked about the preview coming out in Sept for walking dead coming out in October

 

Now I admit that there are possibilities where the above might not mean anything. The comic could have been delayed, but they choose not to reprint the dates...

 

But it's better evidence then you're saying well look diamond shipped them at the same time.....Diamond does not determine 1st appearances...

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
maloney414

maloney414

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Hey Maloney, let me add in waaaay late congrats and thanks on doing this thread.

 

Has your allowable editing time on your original post timed out or have you just not gotten around to plugging in WW WD#1 variants? I think it's up to 5 covers now plus that "new" color version of #1 coming out soon too plus any other Wizard Worlds coming later this year.

 

Yup, the time is up on the edits. (thumbs u

 

I tried to add the 106 variant, and the 109 sketch and I kept getting error messages. At 1st I thought it was the length of the post, but then I tried changing a period to an exclamation mark and it gave me the same error.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
maloney414

maloney414

Posted
  • Author
Posted
This was the rehash of an old thread....

 

So let me talk again about Agents #6 Capes #1

 

I think what is missing is that the author is not working with image, is something of an expert, but not infallible...

 

So the idea that when diamond decides to ship an item determines who has the first appearance seems false.. I am talking about his declaration that agents #6 and Capes #1 is not before walking dead #1. They have earlier publication dates...That matters more to me then when the comic book hit the shelves in his part of the world...

 

Diamond is a near monopoly, but they aren't the only distributor in the world. Telling me when THEY shipped the comic is not proof of which one(s) where first...

 

If there is no smoking gun of proof.

I submit:

-Earlier publication date. Walking dead says October on the cover, Agents 6 and Capes 1 says Sept. For most collectables this is enough. ( oh and the date on the inside is the same as well )

 

-That it was a preview, intended to go before Walking Dead 1 as advertisement..

 

-I linked an article where they talked about the preview coming out in Sept for walking dead coming out in October

 

Now I admit that there are possibilities where the above might not mean anything. The comic could have been delayed, but they choose not to reprint the dates...

 

But it's better evidence then you're saying well look diamond shipped them at the same time.....Diamond does not determine 1st appearances...

 

 

 

You and I just disagree. You value the date inside the comic and I value when the book actually hits stores. We have different definitions of a 1st appearance. You are certainly welcome to your own opinion.

 

As for this comment:

 

Diamond is a near monopoly, but they aren't the only distributor in the world. Telling me when THEY shipped the comic is not proof of which one(s) where first...

 

You mentioned this before, but never followed through with real info.

 

Who else distributed it?? Not providing any proof another company actually distributed it, or any proof they distributed it earlier than Diamond is carnival barking on your part. A hypothetical situation is NOT evidence to make your claims true. 2c

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ranx

ranx

Posted
Posted
This was the rehash of an old thread....

 

So let me talk again about Agents #6 Capes #1

 

I think what is missing is that the author is not working with image, is something of an expert, but not infallible...

 

So the idea that when diamond decides to ship an item determines who has the first appearance seems false.. I am talking about his declaration that agents #6 and Capes #1 is not before walking dead #1. They have earlier publication dates...That matters more to me then when the comic book hit the shelves in his part of the world...

 

Diamond is a near monopoly, but they aren't the only distributor in the world. Telling me when THEY shipped the comic is not proof of which one(s) where first...

 

If there is no smoking gun of proof.

I submit:

-Earlier publication date. Walking dead says October on the cover, Agents 6 and Capes 1 says Sept. For most collectables this is enough. ( oh and the date on the inside is the same as well )

 

-That it was a preview, intended to go before Walking Dead 1 as advertisement..

 

-I linked an article where they talked about the preview coming out in Sept for walking dead coming out in October

 

Now I admit that there are possibilities where the above might not mean anything. The comic could have been delayed, but they choose not to reprint the dates...

 

But it's better evidence then you're saying well look diamond shipped them at the same time.....Diamond does not determine 1st appearances...

 

 

 

You and I just disagree. You value the date inside the comic and I value when the book actually hits stores. We have different definitions of a 1st appearance. You are certainly welcome to your own opinion.

 

As for this comment:

 

Diamond is a near monopoly, but they aren't the only distributor in the world. Telling me when THEY shipped the comic is not proof of which one(s) where first...

 

You mentioned this before, but never followed through with real info.

 

Who else distributed it?? Not providing any proof another company actually distributed it, or any proof they distributed it earlier than Diamond is carnival barking on your part. A hypothetical situation is NOT evidence to make your claims true. 2c

 

 

No, I have not looked into anyone distributing it, you are right about that, and the nature of our disagreement. Thank you for the respectful discourse, I really appreciate it.

 

I don't think though I have to have proof that someone else distributed it. For your assertion to be true, when it hit the comic book racks first, is the first....then YOU need to say that diamond was the only distributor and that they shipped everything at the same time everywhere they service ( never mind if the comic shops actually put the issues down first---agents is before WD--joking ). I'm just suggesting that you can't rely on Diamond shipping logs to determine when something was first...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing