slym2none Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 180 = first appearance (a cameo can be a first appearance, IDK why people are so reluctant to accept that) Do I really need to go into this again? Did you ever read comics as a kid? As in READ them just to READ them and experience the stories, follow your favorite characters, etc.? Well I did, and before sportscard dealers brought this whole "rookie card" mentality to comics in the late-80's, people actually READ these things, so ask yourself this: If you are looking to READ and collect a back issue (remember, there were no TPBs) about your fave character's past exploits, would you choose: a) a comic with the first single panel of your fave character and no cover appearance. or b) a comic with the first entire story about your fave character and an action cover image. That's why "first FULL appearances/covers" were more popular and worth more historically pre-CGC, and will continue to be, as in the CGC entombed comic world, covers mean more than ever. You don't need to shoehorn a first appearance label onto a particular issue just because it is the more sought after book among a character's early appearances. You don't need to call 181 the first appearance of Wolverine to sell it as a desirable issue, the cover and it being his first fight with hulk are enough. +1 -slym Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slym2none Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 If you are looking to READ and collect a back issue (remember, there were no TPBs) about your fave character's past exploits, would you choose: a) a comic with the first single panel of your fave character and no cover appearance. or b) a comic with the first entire story about your fave character and an action cover image. Both. But if I was going or his first appearance (and collectors are allowed to do that, y'know) then I would choose the issue he actually appeared in first. If someone told me that Elf-Frog #4 was Tedious Toad's first appearance & that's what I wanted, but it was actually the last page of Elf-Frog #3, I'd be disappointed - especially if I spent 10 times on Elf-Frog #4 than I did the issue I wanted, EF3. -slym Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slym2none Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 180 = first appearance (a cameo can be a first appearance, IDK why people are so reluctant to accept that) Do I really need to go into this again? Did you ever read comics as a kid? As in READ them just to READ them and experience the stories, follow your favorite characters, etc.? Well I did, and before sportscard dealers brought this whole "rookie card" mentality to comics in the late-80's, people actually READ these things, so ask yourself this: If you are looking to READ and collect a back issue (remember, there were no TPBs) about your fave character's past exploits, would you choose: a) a comic with the first single panel of your fave character and no cover appearance. or b) a comic with the first entire story about your fave character and an action cover image. That's why "first FULL appearances/covers" were more popular and worth more historically pre-CGC, and will continue to be, as in the CGC entombed comic world, covers mean more than ever. You don't need to shoehorn a first appearance label onto a particular issue just because it is the more sought after book among a character's early appearances. You add more legitimacy to the book by separating it from being associated with a character's first appearance, as it is then allowed to stand on its own. You don't need to call 181 the first appearance of Wolverine to sell it as a desirable issue, the cover and it being his first fight with hulk are enough. Ask yourself this, how many comic book stories end with a teaser, hook or whatever on the last page to get you to want to buy the next issue? When that teaser involves a new character, the hobby has always used "cameo appearance" to describe insignificant first appearances by characters. So some people argue that the technical first appearance is the only appearance that should warrant a label that claims to be "first". No one is shoehorning a "first appearance" onto a label, the people arguing for cameos as legitimate "firsts" are trying to rewrite history for whatever reason. This all pre-dates CGC labeling and the hobby's use of "cameo" to describe a first 'minor' appearance comes hand-in-hand with our almost universal understanding that first appearance generally means first "full or feature" appearance. This is what everything boils down to. It's that some people are taking the "first" in the term first appearance way too literally. Like they've stumbled upon this great hidden secret that the word "first" has been misinterpreted by everyone in the hobby for many decades. Heck, some are even claiming that Previews, the solicitation magazine, should be fair grounds for first appearance recognition. If you think I am trying to re-write history, you are the one that's . -slym Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slym2none Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Where did Wolverine first appear in a comic story? We're not talking about a solicitation magazine or ad. There he is in his full glory and named. That is a first appearance, no matter how brief. What's so hard to understand? How do we misinterpret that fact? The issue is not what's more important or worth more. We all know more people want #181 more. That's not the point. Where did he first appear as Wolverine in a comic book story? Collectors paying more for #181 doesn't change the fact that he first appeared in #180. This... this is what I am saying. This is not re-writing history. -slym Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slym2none Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 What about MOS 17 & 18? It seems the cameo is much worth more than the full app. And "the market" decided that. Not anyone "re-writing history." -slym (stinking up the thread again, pardons) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarrisonJohn Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 180- 1st cameo 181- 1st full 182- 3rd GSXM- 4th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaydogrules Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 180 = first appearance (a cameo can be a first appearance, IDK why people are so reluctant to accept that) Do I really need to go into this again? Did you ever read comics as a kid? As in READ them just to READ them and experience the stories, follow your favorite characters, etc.? Well I did, and before sportscard dealers brought this whole "rookie card" mentality to comics in the late-80's, people actually READ these things, so ask yourself this: If you are looking to READ and collect a back issue (remember, there were no TPBs) about your fave character's past exploits, would you choose: a) a comic with the first single panel of your fave character and no cover appearance. or b) a comic with the first entire story about your fave character and an action cover image. That's why "first FULL appearances/covers" were more popular and worth more historically pre-CGC, and will continue to be, as in the CGC entombed comic world, covers mean more than ever. You don't need to shoehorn a first appearance label onto a particular issue just because it is the more sought after book among a character's early appearances. You add more legitimacy to the book by separating it from being associated with a character's first appearance, as it is then allowed to stand on its own. You don't need to call 181 the first appearance of Wolverine to sell it as a desirable issue, the cover and it being his first fight with hulk are enough. Ask yourself this, how many comic book stories end with a teaser, hook or whatever on the last page to get you to want to buy the next issue? When that teaser involves a new character, the hobby has always used "cameo appearance" to describe insignificant first appearances by characters. So some people argue that the technical first appearance is the only appearance that should warrant a label that claims to be "first". No one is shoehorning a "first appearance" onto a label, the people arguing for cameos as legitimate "firsts" are trying to rewrite history for whatever reason. This all pre-dates CGC labeling and the hobby's use of "cameo" to describe a first 'minor' appearance comes hand-in-hand with our almost universal understanding that first appearance generally means first "full or feature" appearance. +1 What he said. There's enough beaten dead horses around here to keep a dog food factory in business for years. -J. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fastballspecial Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Sellers that are pushing the 1st appearance "cameo" aren't really hobbyists or enthusiasts IMO. They are part of this new wave of collectors/sellers from other hobbies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chip Cataldo Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 I'm a hobbyist AND enthusiast...and I push the 1st Appearance (cameo) in my listings, where it applies. I am far from "new wave" (in every sense of the word) as I've been in the hobby for 35 years now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comicopolis Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanfingh Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Sellers that are pushing the 1st appearance "cameo" aren't really hobbyists or enthusiasts IMO. They are part of this new wave of collectors/sellers from other hobbies. That is too much of a broad brush. In my estimation the hobby has always been dominated by completionists - run collectors. But there have always been people who were more interested in #1s or first appearances, even though they historically were in the minority. I made my first master list of first appearances and #1s when I was 14. That always interested me more. Even the runs that I did collect were treated as second class citizens (four books in a Silver bag - front to back to front to back), while the #1s and first apps were bagged and boarded. I realize that your context was speaking about sellers and the "first cameo" phenomenon. I just wanted to put out there that there have been non-run collectors that have been doing it for years. The new twist for me is the Marvel Age/FOOM 2/Previews/Malibu Sun aspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seanfingh Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Those are some Liefeld-esque feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vaillant Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Your new avatar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comicopolis Posted April 12, 2015 Share Posted April 12, 2015 Those are some Liefeld-esque feet. First feet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffro. Posted April 13, 2015 Share Posted April 13, 2015 Marvel Spotlight #32 $150 raw??? Shill much? http://www.ebay.com/itm/Marvel-spotlight-on-the-spider-woman-32-hi-grade-book-/181709756858?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a4ebed9ba Am I missing something, looks normal to me? Didn't you know that anytime something sells for a lot of money that isn't supposed to, it's due to shilling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revat Posted April 13, 2015 Share Posted April 13, 2015 Marvel Spotlight #32 $150 raw??? Shill much? http://www.ebay.com/itm/Marvel-spotlight-on-the-spider-woman-32-hi-grade-book-/181709756858?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a4ebed9ba Am I missing something, looks normal to me? Didn't you know that anytime something sells for a lot of money that isn't supposed to, it's due to shilling? Possibly due to the fact that Spider-Gwen as SPIDER-WOMAN is crazy huge now. So some of those people might be interested in the first appearance of Spider-Woman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hado Posted April 13, 2015 Share Posted April 13, 2015 Marvel Spotlight #32 $150 raw??? Shill much? http://www.ebay.com/itm/Marvel-spotlight-on-the-spider-woman-32-hi-grade-book-/181709756858?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a4ebed9ba Am I missing something, looks normal to me? Didn't you know that anytime something sells for a lot of money that isn't supposed to, it's due to shilling? Possibly due to the fact that Spider-Gwen as SPIDER-WOMAN is crazy huge now. So some of those people might be interested in the first appearance of Spider-Woman. I still haven't read Spider-Gwen, obviously the public don't call her that when in costume, or there'd be no point in wearing a mask. Do they call her Spider-woman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revat Posted April 13, 2015 Share Posted April 13, 2015 Marvel Spotlight #32 $150 raw??? Shill much? http://www.ebay.com/itm/Marvel-spotlight-on-the-spider-woman-32-hi-grade-book-/181709756858?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item2a4ebed9ba Am I missing something, looks normal to me? Didn't you know that anytime something sells for a lot of money that isn't supposed to, it's due to shilling? Possibly due to the fact that Spider-Gwen as SPIDER-WOMAN is crazy huge now. So some of those people might be interested in the first appearance of Spider-Woman. I still haven't read Spider-Gwen, obviously the public don't call her that when in costume, or there'd be no point in wearing a mask. Do they call her Spider-woman? ta da Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
divad Posted April 13, 2015 Share Posted April 13, 2015 Clearly, there's no accounting for good taste . . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverdream Posted April 13, 2015 Share Posted April 13, 2015 180- 1st cameo 181- 1st full 182- 3rd GSXM- 4th I have no skin in this game, but I find it strange that a " 2nd appearance" is missing from this list. When you look at it listed the way it is above, one gets a better idea of how absurd the whole argument is. Its like everyone is trying as hard as they can to not call 181 his 2nd appearance, and go as far as eliminating a 2nd appearance entirely. If 182 is his 3rd appearance, what is his 2nd? Anyone? Then you have to ask.... If 182 is a cameo ( and it is ), why is it considered his 3rd appearance? Based on your standards above, should it not be considered his 3rd appearance ( cameo ) and Giant size x-men be his 3rd full? This is what you are doing for his first appearance above, but change your stance on later appearances ... again ... why is there a double standard in place? I personally think we should consider labeling books ( with 1st cameos ) from now on like this: 180 : 1st appearance of wolverine ( cameo ) 181: 2nd appearance of Wolverine ( 1st full appearance ) 182: 3rd appearance of Wolverine ( cameo ) Giant size X-men 1: 4th appearance of Wolverine ( 2nd full appearance) Uncanny X-men 94 : 5th appearance of Wolverine ( 3rd full appearance) To me, this explains his appearances properly. Cameo has been a term we have used in this hobby forever. It doesn't need to go away, just call them for what they are. They are appearances, period. Cameo or not, label them in order and call them what they are. It doesn't matter if a characters 4th appearance is his 1st full, its still his 4th appearance ( 1st full) (thumbs u Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
