Copper's Heating/Selling Well on Ebay 33 33

[vaillant]

The early X-Factors could get real interesting here as we get closer to 2016 and the upcoming X-Men movie. 3 cameo/fulls to consider:

 

X-Factor 5 or 6-1st Apocalypse

X-Factor 15 or 19-1st Horsemen

X-Factor 23 or 24-1st Archangel

 

Well, I would say that at least for Apocalypse and the horseman Death (not yet Archangel, Archangel is how Warren gets rechristened a:)

 

X-Factor 5 and 6-1st Apocalypse

X-Factor 23 and 24-1st Archangel

[mrwoogieman]

"Do you have any proof of the "released by the distributors as an accident"?"

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

OT, What is less adversarial/accusatory sounding, asking for "evidence" or "proof"? Or does it sound the same to the folks here?

 

Just curious.

 

It's only adversarial/accusatory if you're defensive by nature.

 

People ask me for proof and/or evidence of the things I say all the time, and I don't look at it as being (necessarily) adversarial/accusatory, without further contextual evidence.

 

I'm only asking as a lawyer, particularly curious how non-lawyers perceive the language (maybe one day I will need to think this through when doing a closing argument, for example). At first I thought demanding "proof" sounded more adversarial, but then i thought about it and decided I'm not even sure as "proof" does not mean "prove it" necessarily....

 

Lawyers love the language right?

 

My saying "Prove it!" for 'proof' was just a gut feeling that it was more adversarial than using the word evidence. However, one could just as easily cast 'proof' similarly to how I did 'evidence'; "And what is your proof?" or "Do you have proof of this?", each of which are softer than the command to "Prove it!".

 

Thinking more about it, perhaps 'proof' seems more confrontational because it is monosyllabic rather than the more upscale "evidence", street corner to library so to speak.

 

Language...

[Bosco685]

As people that know me in the real world will attest, I never met a dead horse I didn't enjoy beating.

 

But, hasn't everyone written enough about what their interpretation of a first appearance is?

 

There are some people on here who are persuasive with facts, and well constructed arguments, and yet, other's have their heels dug in as if this was as important as 5x or 10x powdered sugar when baking.

 

It seems to me that nobody is changing their opinion on this, and that to continue to post away just illustrates the steadfastness of those hell bent to bend the malleable to their p.o.v. Problem is, nobody's malleable.

 

 

Although some of these discussions get emotional and heated due to beliefs, opinions and experience, for the most part there are great discussions about comic book history (assumed or otherwise). I wouldn't say because someone posted an extensive amount of research this means you then cut everyone else off from providing their opinion on a topic.

 

So let a good conversation take place. But better to read and listen to everyone's contributions, versus cutting contributors off from sharing their thoughts. Then at least all those sources of information helps build a more thorough picture.

 

Just a suggestion.

 

[Bosco685]

In the case of Gambit's 1st appearance and supposed cameo (we all agree X-Men Annual #14 is far from a cameo), Marvel and its production team are not going to waste time publishing a letter entitled SO SORRY WE MESSED YOU ALL UP - HERE's WHAT HAPPENED.... They don't care if the story was slightly out of synch. In the end, everything it needed to get out to the market was accomplished.

 

Its the fans and collectors left sorting out the details later. But it is just a strange publishing approach to have a later story become a 1st appearance when it references an earlier story. Something got out of whack there with distribution and storytelling.

[darkstar]

And to cause more ruckus about Malibu Sun #13 - It appears that there is a new 1st app of Spawn gaining market share here recently, Rust #1 @ $30 & 37 watchers are all believing they found a new cash cow. MOOOooo!

 

lol

 

That listing is hilarious. Look at the subtitle:

 

"Discovery drastically devalues Malibu Sun 13 - WOW!"

 

 

Yes, it's not enough to hype an ad, but we have to actively speak AGAINST other books!

 

And...here's the real kicker, here....it might not even be accurate.

 

In the early 1990's, things were very, very loosey-goosey. Dates for books NOT distributed via the newsstand had become anachronisms. They no longer served the purpose they once did (that is, to tell newsstand dealers that it was time to take a book OFF sale), and were printed as a matter of tradition, rather than practicality.

 

That doesn't mean that these cover dates serve NO purpose, but they must always, especially during this period, be taken with a grain of salt. Does anyone remember Deathmate Red? The book is cover dated 11/93...but it came out AFTER Deathmate Epilogue, which is dated FOUR MONTHS LATER, 2/94.

 

This is the extreme example, but it is not the only one.

 

Now, does that mean that this book...which is very, very weirdly "hidden" by all these sellers (they don't want people to discover what it is!)...does NOT pre-date Malibu Sun #13? No, not necessarily.

 

This is critical: just because it says "April 1992" does NOT (necessarily) mean it came out "one month before" both MS #13 and Spawn #1.

 

Hucksters and shill-men, PT Barnum is alive and well, and selling on eBay!

 

 

Nobody knows the release date of Crusade of Comics Presents Spawn 1 either

[the blob]

RMA, your brilliance (and I mean that in the nicest way, a three month absence makes the heart grow fonder) is needed on another topic. This horse be dead!

[HighStakesComics]

The early X-Factors could get real interesting here as we get closer to 2016 and the upcoming X-Men movie. 3 cameo/fulls to consider:

 

X-Factor 5 or 6-1st Apocalypse

X-Factor 15 or 19-1st Horsemen

X-Factor 23 or 24-1st Archangel

 

Well, I would say that at least for Apocalypse and the horseman Death (not yet Archangel, Archangel is how Warren gets rechristened a:)

 

X-Factor 5 and 6-1st Apocalypse

X-Factor 23 and 24-1st Archangel

 

I think all 6 will see a bit of momentum in terms of price, but out of the 6 books the 15, 19 and 23 are probably the most overlooked. I'm not even sure CGC recognizes 19 as the 1st full Horsemen of Apocalypse. Until we see a longer preview it will be hard to tell how big of a role they will play within the context of the movie. As a teenager 24-25 was one of my favorite comic book battles so I must admit I am a little biased on behalf of nostalgia

[Vikingreed]

Growing up, I absolutely loved #24...

My first copy was purchased at a little hole in the wall book store. I was so excited, haha.

 

I've been searching for a 9.8 #19 for over a year, and haven't scored one.

 

[valiantman]

Not sure if this is beating a dead horse or adding to the discussion...

 

How long were Annuals supposed to remain on sale?

 

Is it possible it was still a "current issue" as far as the publisher's recommended "pull date" even after X-Men #267?

 

[vaillant]

So we're clear (because, around here, everything needs to be clarified to death), there's nothing wrong with having Marvel Age #97 be worth more than #96, because #97 has a preview of (Insert Hot Flavor Of The Month Character Here.) It's nifty, it's neat, and often features cover art and other goodies that aren't found in the "official" book.

 

There IS something wrong, however, with people walking around saying "OMG, Marvel Age #97 has the REAL first appearance of (Insert Hot Flavor Of The Month Character Here), and is WAYYY more important than (insert actual, contextual first appearance issue here)!!!" Not only is it immensely dishonest, and not at all in keeping with the spirit of both tradition AND publisher intent, it will eventually bite you in the arse when people realize that you were being deceptive.

 

I completely agree with this. All my Marvel Age books have been sitting unbagged and unboarded in my loft (subject to cold and heat) for over twenty years, go figure how sweet the page quality must be.

But I still love them…

[Bosco685]

Not sure if this is beating a dead horse or adding to the discussion...

 

How long were Annuals supposed to remain on sale?

 

Is it possible it was still a "current issue" as far as the publisher's recommended "pull date" even after X-Men #267?

 

[Aweandlorder]

They were trying to keep it secret? It was not hard to figure out.

 

Exaclty.

Here's another one that closed last week with no info on which book it was..

1st spawn in ad listing

 

Different seller it seems, same "exclusive" info

Im not against or for it.. But its interesting

Wonder what the print run of this book is

Regardless of Spawn appearance as an ad on it, it still seems like a rare book as it doesnt come often..

The other thing is.. Get this.. There are two variants for that book

 

ohhhhh boy here we go again

[vaillant]

The early X-Factors could get real interesting here as we get closer to 2016 and the upcoming X-Men movie. 3 cameo/fulls to consider:

 

X-Factor 5 or 6-1st Apocalypse

X-Factor 15 or 19-1st Horsemen

X-Factor 23 or 24-1st Archangel

 

Well, I would say that at least for Apocalypse and the horseman Death (not yet Archangel, Archangel is how Warren gets rechristened a:)

 

X-Factor 5 and 6-1st Apocalypse

X-Factor 23 and 24-1st Archangel

 

I think all 6 will see a bit of momentum in terms of price, but out of the 6 books the 15, 19 and 23 are probably the most overlooked. I'm not even sure CGC recognizes 19 as the 1st full Horsemen of Apocalypse. Until we see a longer preview it will be hard to tell how big of a role they will play within the context of the movie. As a teenager 24-25 was one of my favorite comic book battles so I must admit I am a little biased on behalf of nostalgia

 

A cut and paste partially ate my comment. I wrote that Archangel is rechristened afterwards, when he is freed from Apocalypse's influence.

 

Yes, I entirely agree. And I totally love these issues as well, I was about twenty when they came out, but they marked the beginning of my collecting books in original edition, and X-Factor was one of my favorites, alongside with Power Pack: Louise Simonson was just great in writing these.

[vaillant]

Growing up, I absolutely loved #24...

My first copy was purchased at a little hole in the wall book store. I was so excited, haha.

 

I've been searching for a 9.8 #19 for over a year, and haven't scored one.

 

I loved them all, I think I started reading X-Factor with 22-23 and then get back and was able to track down backwards issues up to #15. Was super-stoked when I picked the first ones, although I realized the book was weak at the beginning, both in terms of art and writing, but when Louise Simonson starts writing (with #5, I believe), and warms up… some episodes were instant classics.

 

Unbelievably, back then the distributor here in Italy was out of #25s, and I have managed to recover #25 just recently, as I never had it (probably the only issue I was missing).

[Aweandlorder]

Here's one that thought "no guts, no glory"

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Rust-1-1st-Ad-Appearance-of-Spawn-Adventure-Comics-Malibu-April-1992-/381145077281?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item58be045621

[500Club]

As people that know me in the real world will attest, I never met a dead horse I didn't enjoy beating.

 

But, hasn't everyone written enough about what their interpretation of a first appearance is?

 

There are some people on here who are persuasive with facts, and well constructed arguments, and yet, other's have their heels dug in as if this was as important as 5x or 10x powdered sugar when baking.

 

It seems to me that nobody is changing their opinion on this, and that to continue to post away just illustrates the steadfastness of those hell bent to bend the malleable to their p.o.v. Problem is, nobody's malleable.

 

 

Although some of these discussions get emotional and heated due to beliefs, opinions and experience, for the most part there are great discussions about comic book history (assumed or otherwise). I wouldn't say because someone posted an extensive amount of research this means you then cut everyone else off from providing their opinion on a topic.

 

So let a good conversation take place. But better to read and listen to everyone's contributions, versus cutting contributors off from sharing their thoughts. Then at least all those sources of information helps build a more thorough picture.

 

Just a suggestion.

 

I agree. Let the discussions flow. They often spin off into useful side topics. They also allow everyone a chance to chime in on their views on the topic at hand. (thumbs u

[Illustrious]

As people that know me in the real world will attest, I never met a dead horse I didn't enjoy beating.

 

But, hasn't everyone written enough about what their interpretation of a first appearance is?

 

There are some people on here who are persuasive with facts, and well constructed arguments, and yet, other's have their heels dug in as if this was as important as 5x or 10x powdered sugar when baking.

 

It seems to me that nobody is changing their opinion on this, and that to continue to post away just illustrates the steadfastness of those hell bent to bend the malleable to their p.o.v. Problem is, nobody's malleable.

 

 

Although some of these discussions get emotional and heated due to beliefs, opinions and experience, for the most part there are great discussions about comic book history (assumed or otherwise). I wouldn't say because someone posted an extensive amount of research this means you then cut everyone else off from providing their opinion on a topic.

 

So let a good conversation take place. But better to read and listen to everyone's contributions, versus cutting contributors off from sharing their thoughts. Then at least all those sources of information helps build a more thorough picture.

 

Just a suggestion.

 

I agree. Let the discussions flow. They often spin off into useful side topics. They also allow everyone a chance to chime in on their views on the topic at hand. (thumbs u

 

(thumbs u x2

[500Club]

In the case of Gambit's 1st appearance and supposed cameo (we all agree X-Men Annual #14 is far from a cameo), Marvel and its production team are not going to waste time publishing a letter entitled SO SORRY WE MESSED YOU ALL UP - HERE's WHAT HAPPENED.... They don't care if the story was slightly out of synch. In the end, everything it needed to get out to the market was accomplished.

 

Its the fans and collectors left sorting out the details later. But it is just a strange publishing approach to have a later story become a 1st appearance when it references an earlier story. Something got out of whack there with distribution and storytelling.

My best guess is that Marvel hashed out a rough plan for releases 6-12 months ahead, with the releases in proper order. Given the way he was scattergunning concepts and subplots at the time, Claremont probably got sidetracked on a storyline, and ended up having Gambit appear in UXM 2-3 months later than the original blueprint.

[RockMyAmadeus]

RMA, your brilliance (and I mean that in the nicest way, a three month absence makes the heart grow fonder) is needed on another topic. This horse be dead!

 

These sort of posts always baffle me.

 

You know that no one (and this goes for all reading this) just rattles off endlessly on any subject by themselves for very long, right...?

 

You know that any topic that is discussed has AT LEAST 2 people involved, right...?

 

Why is only one person (no matter who) mentioned? Why are the others (no matter who) not included in these types of comments?

 

Why are people bothered about what other people want to talk about?

 

"You have talked about subject A long enough, time to move on to subject B!"

 

According to who...?

 

Post what you want to post. Let other people post what they want to post. If two people want to discuss the cheese that the moon is made of for 10,000 posts, what does it matter to anyone else? If it bothers you that much, put those two people on ignore, and you don't have to see anything they say.

 

All this desire to control people, it's very off-putting.

[Vikingreed]

Wait, the moon is made of cheese?!?!?!

 

I knew it. I knew IT!!!