• 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.

Deadpool 2nd Appearance

Started by MrWeen,

146 posts in this topic

MrWeen

MrWeen

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I believe it was x-force 2 and is labeled so by CGC.

 

This is why i want to sort this out. CGC has been wrong before and in this case i believe they are again.

 

At the end of the gold 2nd print for X-Force 1 there is an id card similar to the ones on the back of G.I.Joe toys or in the marvel Encyclopedia comics. Dead pool IS pictured there. This addition is only in the reprint which predates the issue 2 of the X-Force series. i ask because despite high a print run for issue 2 there has been some interest in that issue as a second appearance. I don't know what the print run was for the gold 2nd of issue 1 but i suspect it was much lower than issue 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
seanfingh

seanfingh

Posted
Posted
I believe it was x-force 2 and is labeled so by CGC.

 

This is why i want to sort this out. CGC has been wrong before and in this case i believe they are again.

 

At the end of the gold 2nd print for X-Force 1 there is an id card similar to the ones on the back of G.I.Joe toys or in the marvel Encyclopedia comics. Dead pool IS pictured there. This addition is only in the reprint which predates the issue 2 of the X-Force series. i ask because despite high a print run for issue 2 there has been some interest in that issue as a second appearance. I don't know what the print run was for the gold 2nd of issue 1 but i suspect it was much lower than issue 2.

 

At the risk of sounding like Bill Clinton, the main issue is what does "appearance" mean? For literalists, it may be #1 Gold because his likeness is there, hence it is an appearance. For contextualists, appearance typically means that the character "appeared" in the story line. Comic collectors (and their secondary market) tend to favor a more contextual approach.

 

The same logic is then applied to the significance of the appearance. For example, Doomsday's arm appears in MOS 17, so it is a literal appearance, but it is not considered particularly material, thus MOS 18 is the key book.

 

What nearly always happens, is that the value of these books gets looped in to the analysis. People think Hulk 180 is undervalued because it has the first appearance of Wolverine. While that may or may not have merit or appeal, when the market speaks, it rarely reverses field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bosco685

Bosco685

Posted
Posted
I believe it was x-force 2 and is labeled so by CGC.

 

This is why i want to sort this out. CGC has been wrong before and in this case i believe they are again.

 

At the end of the gold 2nd print for X-Force 1 there is an id card similar to the ones on the back of G.I.Joe toys or in the marvel Encyclopedia comics. Dead pool IS pictured there. This addition is only in the reprint which predates the issue 2 of the X-Force series. i ask because despite high a print run for issue 2 there has been some interest in that issue as a second appearance. I don't know what the print run was for the gold 2nd of issue 1 but i suspect it was much lower than issue 2.

 

It's not just the X-Force 1 2nd print that has the Cable Guide profiles.

 

wgSuomyl.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pubmonkey

pubmonkey

Posted
Posted
I believe it was x-force 2 and is labeled so by CGC.

 

This is why i want to sort this out. CGC has been wrong before and in this case i believe they are again.

 

At the end of the gold 2nd print for X-Force 1 there is an id card similar to the ones on the back of G.I.Joe toys or in the marvel Encyclopedia comics. Dead pool IS pictured there. This addition is only in the reprint which predates the issue 2 of the X-Force series. i ask because despite high a print run for issue 2 there has been some interest in that issue as a second appearance. I don't know what the print run was for the gold 2nd of issue 1 but i suspect it was much lower than issue 2.

 

At the risk of sounding like Bill Clinton, the main issue is what does "appearance" mean? For literalists, it may be #1 Gold because his likeness is there, hence it is an appearance. For contextualists, appearance typically means that the character "appeared" in the story line. Comic collectors (and their secondary market) tend to favor a more contextual approach.

 

The same logic is then applied to the significance of the appearance. For example, Doomsday's arm appears in MOS 17, so it is a literal appearance, but it is not considered particularly material, thus MOS 18 is the key book.

 

What nearly always happens, is that the value of these books gets looped in to the analysis. People think Hulk 180 is undervalued because it has the first appearance of Wolverine. While that may or may not have merit or appeal, when the market speaks, it rarely reverses field.

 

Well said!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrWeen

MrWeen

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I believe it was x-force 2 and is labeled so by CGC.

 

This is why i want to sort this out. CGC has been wrong before and in this case i believe they are again.

 

At the end of the gold 2nd print for X-Force 1 there is an id card similar to the ones on the back of G.I.Joe toys or in the marvel Encyclopedia comics. Dead pool IS pictured there. This addition is only in the reprint which predates the issue 2 of the X-Force series. i ask because despite high a print run for issue 2 there has been some interest in that issue as a second appearance. I don't know what the print run was for the gold 2nd of issue 1 but i suspect it was much lower than issue 2.

 

At the risk of sounding like Bill Clinton, the main issue is what does "appearance" mean? For literalists, it may be #1 Gold because his likeness is there, hence it is an appearance. For contextualists, appearance typically means that the character "appeared" in the story line. Comic collectors (and their secondary market) tend to favor a more contextual approach.

 

The same logic is then applied to the significance of the appearance. For example, Doomsday's arm appears in MOS 17, so it is a literal appearance, but it is not considered particularly material, thus MOS 18 is the key book.

 

What nearly always happens, is that the value of these books gets looped in to the analysis. People think Hulk 180 is undervalued because it has the first appearance of Wolverine. While that may or may not have merit or appeal, when the market speaks, it rarely reverses field.

 

I am not talking about value tho I do recognize that X-Force 2's value is altered based on what the market decides. And yet what the market decides the value is of a comic does not change the facts about the comic.

Personally i don't care about the value of X-force 2

Marvel added the Deadpool card to issue 1. Is that an appearance? Not in comics because it was in a different medium. But they did add the bio and likeness of Deadpool in that reprint. My point here is that there is a lot of erroneous and missing info on character appearances all over the web, and on some pretty popular pages. I see it as a collector our duty to make sure properties we enjoy are accurately represented. Deadpool is a great case because he has so few appearances prior to his own inaugural series. By the way a book like the Deadpolica Encyclopedia is cataloged as a chronological appearance on webs like the CB Database but they don't even list the gold reprint as an appearance at all. Here is another example, The Marvel Preview 93 should be listed as an appearance of Deadpool because of one head shot in the magazine. I hear your counter but for X-Force 2 to be considered his second you need your word contextual put before appearance every time.

 

Appearance is defined as...The act or an instance of coming into sight. presented before the eye and mind before the public.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrWeen

MrWeen

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I believe it was x-force 2 and is labeled so by CGC.

 

This is why i want to sort this out. CGC has been wrong before and in this case i believe they are again.

 

At the end of the gold 2nd print for X-Force 1 there is an id card similar to the ones on the back of G.I.Joe toys or in the marvel Encyclopedia comics. Dead pool IS pictured there. This addition is only in the reprint which predates the issue 2 of the X-Force series. i ask because despite high a print run for issue 2 there has been some interest in that issue as a second appearance. I don't know what the print run was for the gold 2nd of issue 1 but i suspect it was much lower than issue 2.

 

It's not just the X-Force 1 2nd print that has the Cable Guide profiles.

 

wgSuomyl.jpg

 

True. But I have never seen the Deadpool one printed anywhere before the Gold Reprint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
seanfingh

seanfingh

Posted
Posted
I believe it was x-force 2 and is labeled so by CGC.

 

This is why i want to sort this out. CGC has been wrong before and in this case i believe they are again.

 

At the end of the gold 2nd print for X-Force 1 there is an id card similar to the ones on the back of G.I.Joe toys or in the marvel Encyclopedia comics. Dead pool IS pictured there. This addition is only in the reprint which predates the issue 2 of the X-Force series. i ask because despite high a print run for issue 2 there has been some interest in that issue as a second appearance. I don't know what the print run was for the gold 2nd of issue 1 but i suspect it was much lower than issue 2.

 

At the risk of sounding like Bill Clinton, the main issue is what does "appearance" mean? For literalists, it may be #1 Gold because his likeness is there, hence it is an appearance. For contextualists, appearance typically means that the character "appeared" in the story line. Comic collectors (and their secondary market) tend to favor a more contextual approach.

 

The same logic is then applied to the significance of the appearance. For example, Doomsday's arm appears in MOS 17, so it is a literal appearance, but it is not considered particularly material, thus MOS 18 is the key book.

 

What nearly always happens, is that the value of these books gets looped in to the analysis. People think Hulk 180 is undervalued because it has the first appearance of Wolverine. While that may or may not have merit or appeal, when the market speaks, it rarely reverses field.

 

I am not talking about value tho I do recognize that X-Force 2's value is altered based on what the market decides. And yet what the market decides the value is of a comic does not change the facts about the comic.

Personally i don't care about the value of X-force 2

Marvel added the Deadpool card to issue 1. Is that an appearance? Not in comics because it was in a different medium. But they did add the bio and likeness of Deadpool in that reprint. My point here is that there is a lot of erroneous and missing info on character appearances all over the web, and on some pretty popular pages. I see it as a collector our duty to make sure properties we enjoy are accurately represented. Deadpool is a great case because he has so few appearances prior to his own inaugural series. By the way a book like the Deadpolica Encyclopedia is cataloged as a chronological appearance on webs like the CB Database but they don't even list the gold reprint as an appearance at all. Here is another example, The Marvel Preview 93 should be listed as an appearance of Deadpool because of one head shot in the magazine. I hear your counter but for X-Force 2 to be considered his second you need your word contextual put before appearance every time.

 

Appearance is defined as...The act or an instance of coming into sight. presented before the eye and mind before the public.

 

 

 

 

You are pretty much right in everything you have said. But the literalists are far outnumbered amongst comic collectors. You should hear the GA guys rumble about ad pages for Tec 27 being the first appearance of Batman . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrWeen

MrWeen

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I believe it was x-force 2 and is labeled so by CGC.

 

This is why i want to sort this out. CGC has been wrong before and in this case i believe they are again.

 

At the end of the gold 2nd print for X-Force 1 there is an id card similar to the ones on the back of G.I.Joe toys or in the marvel Encyclopedia comics. Dead pool IS pictured there. This addition is only in the reprint which predates the issue 2 of the X-Force series. i ask because despite high a print run for issue 2 there has been some interest in that issue as a second appearance. I don't know what the print run was for the gold 2nd of issue 1 but i suspect it was much lower than issue 2.

 

At the risk of sounding like Bill Clinton, the main issue is what does "appearance" mean? For literalists, it may be #1 Gold because his likeness is there, hence it is an appearance. For contextualists, appearance typically means that the character "appeared" in the story line. Comic collectors (and their secondary market) tend to favor a more contextual approach.

 

The same logic is then applied to the significance of the appearance. For example, Doomsday's arm appears in MOS 17, so it is a literal appearance, but it is not considered particularly material, thus MOS 18 is the key book.

 

What nearly always happens, is that the value of these books gets looped in to the analysis. People think Hulk 180 is undervalued because it has the first appearance of Wolverine. While that may or may not have merit or appeal, when the market speaks, it rarely reverses field.

 

I am not talking about value tho I do recognize that X-Force 2's value is altered based on what the market decides. And yet what the market decides the value is of a comic does not change the facts about the comic.

Personally i don't care about the value of X-force 2

Marvel added the Deadpool card to issue 1. Is that an appearance? Not in comics because it was in a different medium. But they did add the bio and likeness of Deadpool in that reprint. My point here is that there is a lot of erroneous and missing info on character appearances all over the web, and on some pretty popular pages. I see it as a collector our duty to make sure properties we enjoy are accurately represented. Deadpool is a great case because he has so few appearances prior to his own inaugural series. By the way a book like the Deadpolica Encyclopedia is cataloged as a chronological appearance on webs like the CB Database but they don't even list the gold reprint as an appearance at all. Here is another example, The Marvel Preview 93 should be listed as an appearance of Deadpool because of one head shot in the magazine. I hear your counter but for X-Force 2 to be considered his second you need your word contextual put before appearance every time.

 

Appearance is defined as...The act or an instance of coming into sight. presented before the eye and mind before the public.

 

 

 

 

You are pretty much right in everything you have said. But the literalists are far outnumbered amongst comic collectors. You should hear the GA guys rumble about ad pages for Tec 27 being the first appearance of Batman . . .

 

That's funny I have never heard that one before! I am also putting together a collection of every Deadpool comic and mag appearance including the Wizard mags which sucks. There are def a few comic appearances that people just don't know about. I also have an affinity for that gold reprint. It's a much better buy that the so called collector's item first issue of that series. Those pollybagged issues, Silver Surfer 50 and Superman 75 made me hate collecting comics for some years.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AGGIEZ

AGGIEZ

Posted
Posted
8729480277_b3c75a8e7c_h.jpg

 

You have all kinds of goodies, don't you ? :busy:

 

 

Yep! I spend my time and money slabbing all kinds of very cool books. It consistently sells between $35-50 so slabbing a high grade copy isn't quite as brainless as some would make it out to be. And, when the Deadpool movie talk starts this'll be a great one to have in the sales threads... (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrWeen

MrWeen

Posted
  • Author
Posted
8729480277_b3c75a8e7c_h.jpg

 

You have all kinds of goodies, don't you ? :busy:

 

 

Yep! I spend my time and money slabbing all kinds of very cool books. It consistently sells between $35-50 so slabbing a high grade copy isn't quite as brainless as some would make it out to be. And, when the Deadpool movie talk starts this'll be a great one to have in the sales threads... (thumbs u

 

Yea ya know what I apologize. I would buy this for 35

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bosco685

Bosco685

Posted
Posted
I believe it was x-force 2 and is labeled so by CGC.

 

This is why i want to sort this out. CGC has been wrong before and in this case i believe they are again.

 

At the end of the gold 2nd print for X-Force 1 there is an id card similar to the ones on the back of G.I.Joe toys or in the marvel Encyclopedia comics. Dead pool IS pictured there. This addition is only in the reprint which predates the issue 2 of the X-Force series. i ask because despite high a print run for issue 2 there has been some interest in that issue as a second appearance. I don't know what the print run was for the gold 2nd of issue 1 but i suspect it was much lower than issue 2.

 

It's not just the X-Force 1 2nd print that has the Cable Guide profiles.

 

wgSuomyl.jpg

 

True. But I have never seen the Deadpool one printed anywhere before the Gold Reprint.

 

It is a cool little piece of Deadpool history. But I think a profile snapshot may not qualify as an appearance. Deadpool completest will want it, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrWeen

MrWeen

Posted
  • Author
Posted
By this rational the back of the shirtless McFarlane card would be the first appearance of Spawn.

 

well these days malibu sun 13 is considered spawns first by the marketplace and that's just a cover image, no contextual appearance there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hado

Hado

Posted
Posted
By this rational the back of the shirtless McFarlane card would be the first appearance of Spawn.

 

well these days malibu sun 13 is considered spawns first by the marketplace and that's just a cover image, no contextual appearance there.

I still think the image on the card pre-dates all
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing