RockMyAmadeus Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Man that's close. I'm not sure that passes the 299 test, but I'm not sure that's a cameo either. I'd say that Iron Man 118 clearly has no business being a full appearance. Like RMA said, if that 299 weren't sandwiched between two monsters that might be considered a full appearance. Disputing the might of ASM 300 would be a fools errand though. If I had to make a call Id reluctantly say yes, that ST 180 probably qualifies as the first full. Slight correction...I didn't say #299 would be considered a "full appearance", because it's not. It would be, however, more important if not for #298. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockMyAmadeus Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Man that's close. I'm not sure that passes the 299 test, but I'm not sure that's a cameo either. I'd say that Iron Man 118 clearly has no business being a full appearance. Like RMA said, if that 299 weren't sandwiched between two monsters that might be considered a full appearance. Disputing the might of ASM 300 would be a fools errand though. If I had to make a call Id reluctantly say yes, that ST 180 probably qualifies as the first full. Exactly, it's people hoarding 181 I disagree with. Do you have any you'd be willing to part with...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the blob Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Iron Man #118, Jim Rhodes panels on last page.... This is false. It's on page 5 of 18. oops...you're right, its not on the last page. But the point was these are the only panels. Doesnt change that important fact. Being on the last page or page 5 or page 12 really doesnt affect the point. But thanks for correcting that. He's named, his job is identified, he's wearing a yellow hat and he has a big thumbs up. Sounds like a first app to me! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the blob Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Iron Man #118, Jim Rhodes panels on last page.... This is false. It's on page 5 of 18. oops...you're right, its not on the last page. But the point was these are the only panels. Doesnt change that important fact. Being on the last page or page 5 or page 12 really doesnt affect the point. But thanks for correcting that. But when is the next time we see him? Is it for another 2 panels and so on and so on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighStakesComics Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Man that's close. I'm not sure that passes the 299 test, but I'm not sure that's a cameo either. I'd say that Iron Man 118 clearly has no business being a full appearance. Like RMA said, if that 299 weren't sandwiched between two monsters that might be considered a full appearance. Disputing the might of ASM 300 would be a fools errand though. If I had to make a call Id reluctantly say yes, that ST 180 probably qualifies as the first full. Exactly, it's people hoarding 181 I disagree with. Nothing wrong with hoarding and speculation. I'm in the process of hoarding Green Lantern 87 and Strange Tales 126 right now. I prefer to load up on books that I like versus buying complete runs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catch21 Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Iron Man #118, Jim Rhodes panels on last page.... This is false. It's on page 5 of 18. oops...you're right, its not on the last page. But the point was these are the only panels. Doesnt change that important fact. Being on the last page or page 5 or page 12 really doesnt affect the point. But thanks for correcting that. But when is the next time we see him? Is it for another 2 panels and so on and so on? he doesn't appear again until Iron Man 121. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akaSteveRogers Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 (edited) Iron Man #118, Jim Rhodes panels on last page.... This is false. It's on page 5 of 18. oops...you're right, its not on the last page. But the point was these are the only panels. Doesnt change that important fact. Being on the last page or page 5 or page 12 really doesnt affect the point. But thanks for correcting that. He's named, his job is identified, he's wearing a yellow hat and he has a big thumbs up. Sounds like a first app to me! this.. I said this in my previous post. I believe this appropriate for a supporting character, which he clearly was at that point in time. I think we are getting carried away to expect 1st brief...then 1st full appearance of every supporting character. What's next 1st brief and full appearance of "Happy" Hogan or Pepper Potts? Edited August 14, 2014 by akaSteveRogers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HighStakesComics Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Man that's close. I'm not sure that passes the 299 test, but I'm not sure that's a cameo either. I'd say that Iron Man 118 clearly has no business being a full appearance. Like RMA said, if that 299 weren't sandwiched between two monsters that might be considered a full appearance. Disputing the might of ASM 300 would be a fools errand though. If I had to make a call Id reluctantly say yes, that ST 180 probably qualifies as the first full. Slight correction...I didn't say #299 would be considered a "full appearance", because it's not. It would be, however, more important if not for #298. Sorry, bud. Didn't mean to speak for ya. I have a hard time not calling 299 a 1st full. If we are talking in real estate terms, Venom takes up more of it than Rhodes in IM 118 and Gamora in ST 180 combined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the 716-migration Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGGIEZ Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Let me throw this "1st full appearance" on to the fire... Batman #357 - 1st full appearance of Killer Croc? What a crock... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the 716-migration Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 The problem is that since there was never any established guidelines in place as to what is required to constitute a 1st full appearance as opposed to a cameo, there is always going to be inconstancies across different issues that for one reason or another, the market has determined that in one instance its a 1st appearance but in another similar instance, its a cameo. My suggestion would be for Overstreet to publish a set criteria for what is required for a 1st full appearance. It would have to be applied, however, as of a certain date and then all issues would follow this criteria going forward. It probably would be far too difficult for it to be applied retroactively for the any books older than copper. ( the market would never accept 180 as the true 1st Wolverine regardless of what Overstreet states). All books published prior to this designated date ( for example 1990), the market could dictate what the 1st appearance is- as it has always done. I would suggest the following as the criteria needed for a 1st full appearance 1) at least one panel where the character has a majority of his/her body shown. No shadows, arms, face shots, etc... Web 19 and CAP 359 violate this rule 2) Covers count, as do previews contained in a different issue, but ads do not count. The appearance has to be a self contained story or related to the story- i.e. cover to the story. ex)Omega men 3 and X-men 282 3)The character name must be established at the time of the appearance- either by character, other characters, or writer- .i.e.-AMS 299- states Venom in block text at bottom of page. Strange tales 180 would not count as Gamora's name is not revealed until next issue. 4)Costume appearances are different than non-costume. There is distinction. Norman Osborn 1st appearance is not the same as Green Goblin. They are 2 diff characters. Same with Cable and baby Nathan- i.e NM 87 and x-men 201. 5) Group appearances- whole team must be present in same panel not just in story shown in separate actions- prior rules 1-4 apply as well. Ex.- AF is X-men 121 and GOG is gog 1 2007 series. The goal is to be able to identify the character(s) without ever needing another source to aid in identifying the character. It should be apparent from this appearance and this appearance alone. The only exception that I can think of is G.I. Joe 21. since it is a silent issue, rule 3 never comes into play. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silverdream Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 (edited) I think you are drastically underestimating the influence CGC has on the market. People do not have to buy into CGC to pay attention to what they are doing with certain books. There are 2,704,568 currently for sale on eBay in the section titled "comics." Of those listings, 64,061 have CGC in the title, which includes PGX books, "CGC it!" and the like. So, 2.4% of the listings are "CGC related." The other 97.6% of the listings in comics have no direct link to CGC. I think it's safe to say that the vast majority of the comic collecting world doesn't really care about CGC. Just for comparison's sake: 120,827 of the listings have "Batman" in the title. Nearly twice as many listings have to do with one character, than all the listings that have CGC in the title combined. RMA you are a pretty smart dude, but I cannot even comprehend what any of that has to do with CGC's influence on the collecting community. 2.6% of ebay listings are CGC "related" So what? So there is a tiny number of CGC related books on ebay compared to raw ungraded and that means "most' collectors don't care about CGC? I think all your numbers show is that the vast majority of comics are not worth CGC grading fees, shipping fees, 4 month waiting times et cetera. You realize that slabbing a book costs $20+ right? How many of those "raw" copies cost less than the cost of slabbing? These numbers you are throwing out really doesn't show anything other than there are millions of comics not worth the cost of slabbing. Using these numbers in the way you are is reaching for something that isn't there. Edited August 14, 2014 by Silverdream Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkstar Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Let me throw this "1st full appearance" on to the fire... Batman #357 - 1st full appearance of Killer Croc? What a crock... I believe there is more than just that page where he appears. I could be wrong as I don't have any raw copies at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingDonut Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Iron Man #118, Jim Rhodes panels on last page.... This is false. It's on page 5 of 18. oops...you're right, its not on the last page. But the point was these are the only panels. Doesnt change that important fact. Being on the last page or page 5 or page 12 really doesnt affect the point. But thanks for correcting that. He's named, his job is identified, he's wearing a yellow hat and he has a big thumbs up. Sounds like a first app to me! Jim Rhodes' appearance is the exact same as Scott Lang's in Avengers 181, which is nuts hot. Who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Bronze age fan* Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 I think you are drastically underestimating the influence CGC has on the market. People do not have to buy into CGC to pay attention to what they are doing with certain books. There are 2,704,568 currently for sale on eBay in the section titled "comics." Of those listings, 64,061 have CGC in the title, which includes PGX books, "CGC it!" and the like. So, 2.4% of the listings are "CGC related." The other 97.6% of the listings in comics have no direct link to CGC. I think it's safe to say that the vast majority of the comic collecting world doesn't really care about CGC. Just for comparison's sake: 120,827 of the listings have "Batman" in the title. Nearly twice as many listings have to do with one character, than all the listings that have CGC in the title combined. RMA you are a pretty smart dude, but I cannot even comprehend what any of that has to do with CGC's influence on the collecting community. 2.6% of ebay listings are CGC "related" So what? So there is a tiny number of CGC related books on ebay compared to raw ungraded and that means "most' collectors don't care about CGC? I think all your numbers show is that the vast majority of comics are not worth CGC grading fees, shipping fees, 4 month waiting times et cetera. You realize that slabbing a book costs $20+ right? How many of those "raw" copies cost less than the cost of slabbing? These numbers you are throwing out really doesn't show anything other than there are millions of comics not worth the cost of slabbing. Using these numbers in the way you are is reaching for something that isn't there. So people do not sell and buy expensive comics that are not CGCed? Good luck in your debate with RMA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Illustrious Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Iron Man #118, Jim Rhodes panels on last page.... This is false. It's on page 5 of 18. oops...you're right, its not on the last page. But the point was these are the only panels. Doesnt change that important fact. Being on the last page or page 5 or page 12 really doesnt affect the point. But thanks for correcting that. He's named, his job is identified, he's wearing a yellow hat and he has a big thumbs up. Sounds like a first app to me! Jim Rhodes' appearance is the exact same as Scott Lang's in Avengers 181, which is nuts hot. Who knows. But isn't that Scott Lang on the cover of #181? I think that trumps any comparisons to Iron Man #118. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the blob Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Iron Man #118, Jim Rhodes panels on last page.... This is false. It's on page 5 of 18. oops...you're right, its not on the last page. But the point was these are the only panels. Doesnt change that important fact. Being on the last page or page 5 or page 12 really doesnt affect the point. But thanks for correcting that. He's named, his job is identified, he's wearing a yellow hat and he has a big thumbs up. Sounds like a first app to me! Jim Rhodes' appearance is the exact same as Scott Lang's in Avengers 181, which is nuts hot. Who knows. OH criminey, I just went through about 20,000 randomly assorted books to pull "what's hot" and now you tell me there's one I probably passed over 20 times in there...UHG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTLarsen Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Enjoying the first-appearance debate. Curious to hear how you folks think it applies to a group--in fact, this is the converse of the GotG first-appearance debate. Brave and Bold 54 is listed as the first appearance of the Teen Titans. But they're never called the Teen Titans and don't even form a group. Three of the founding characters, yes, but no group. If Brave and Bold 60 had never been published, no one ever would've referred to 54 as the first appearance of Teen Titans. It's only in 60 that they form a group and are called Teen Titans. So...how do the various metrics you guys have applied to character first appearances...apply to the Teen Titans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimebuster Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Enjoying the first-appearance debate. Curious to hear how you folks think it applies to a group--in fact, this is the converse of the GotG first-appearance debate. Brave and Bold 54 is listed as the first appearance of the Teen Titans. But they're never called the Teen Titans and don't even form a group. Three of the founding characters, yes, but no group. If Brave and Bold 60 had never been published, no one ever would've referred to 54 as the first appearance of Teen Titans. It's only in 60 that they form a group and are called Teen Titans. So...how do the various metrics you guys have applied to character first appearances...apply to the Teen Titans? #60 is the first Teen Titans in my opinion. #54 is the equivalent of Sub-Mariner #35 for the Defenders - a prototype story that led to the founding of the group. Both Teen Titans and Defenders had a key character missing from the prototype stories as well - Donna Troy for the Titans and Dr. Strange for the Defenders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimebuster Posted August 14, 2014 Share Posted August 14, 2014 Iron Man #118, Jim Rhodes panels on last page.... This is false. It's on page 5 of 18. oops...you're right, its not on the last page. But the point was these are the only panels. Doesnt change that important fact. Being on the last page or page 5 or page 12 really doesnt affect the point. But thanks for correcting that. He's named, his job is identified, he's wearing a yellow hat and he has a big thumbs up. Sounds like a first app to me! Jim Rhodes' appearance is the exact same as Scott Lang's in Avengers 181, which is nuts hot. Who knows. But isn't that Scott Lang on the cover of #181? I think that trumps any comparisons to Iron Man #118. I don't see Scott Lang anywhere on the cover. The guy not in costume is Henry Peter Gyrich. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
