Can anyone post a picture of Wolverine from Hulk #180

[comix4fun]

I don't like the whole "in cameo" or "full appearance" thing. I understand that they are established descriptions by now and they're not going away. I just don't like them. But ultimately this is going to be an argument in semantics, anyway.

 

180 is Wolverine's first appearance. No other qualifier needed. First appearance.

 

181 is Wolverine's first story line and first appearance on the cover of a comic (a great cover). It is his second appearance, no other qualifier needed.

 

I think 181 will always sell for more, even if what I've written above were to become universally accepted, because I think that first cover appearance is that powerful. But I can see the gap in sales prices between the two, grades held equal, closing. Own both, that's the ticket.

 

There was a discussion a while back on when Jim Rhodes first appears. It led to the typical topic of what criteria leads to a 1st appearance.

 

the first appearance of cable is actually in NM 86 not NM 87.

 

And Sabertooth is actually Iron Fist 13.

 

So if we take the approach any appearance is a 1st appearance, then some books considered minor in the past just jumped ahead. And now X-Force #1 does have some relevance, as the one-page bio on Deadpool now becomes his official 2nd appearance.

 

Commonly, they are considered 1st cameos or advertisements or minor mentions.

 

 

Same goes for X-factor 5 and 6.

 

One panel images, meant as a teaser for the next issue, simply don't carry the weight and relevance of the actual full introduction of the character. That's why, decades later, one is more desired than the other.

[comix4fun]

stop guys your gonna make people with #181's start to pee

 

There should be some sort of Offical Comic Guide we could go off of that is put out my industry leaders and have like a tribunal about camel toes and 1st app.

 

why cant we change the industry for the better !

 

New 1st darkseid = Forever people 1

 

New 1st Wolverine = Hulk #180

 

etc. it seems we all know this but CGC doesn't .... huh go figure

 

 

CGC knows it just fine..... it's right there on the label.

 

 

 

This is interesting - I know there are other label notations of cameo appearances, but are there any other examples of "First appearance of [x] in cameo"?

 

I wonder whether this notation was created after the #181 notation started causing controversy, or whether they were both noted as such from the beginning. Anyone know?

 

 

 

Overstreet has carried the "1st app in cameo" and "1st full app" designations for several books for as long as I can remember.

[Balham's Finest]

stop guys your gonna make people with #181's start to pee

 

There should be some sort of Offical Comic Guide we could go off of that is put out my industry leaders and have like a tribunal about camel toes and 1st app.

 

why cant we change the industry for the better !

 

New 1st darkseid = Forever people 1

 

New 1st Wolverine = Hulk #180

 

etc. it seems we all know this but CGC doesn't .... huh go figure

 

 

CGC knows it just fine..... it's right there on the label.

 

 

 

This is interesting - I know there are other label notations of cameo appearances, but are there any other examples of "First appearance of [x] in cameo"?

 

I wonder whether this notation was created after the #181 notation started causing controversy, or whether they were both noted as such from the beginning. Anyone know?

 

 

 

Overstreet has carried the "1st app in cameo" and "1st full app" designations for several books for as long as I can remember.

 

Thanks. Any other examples for major characters? Is Venom one, like some people mentioned?

[Bosco685]

Same goes for X-factor 5 and 6.

 

One panel images, meant as a teaser for the next issue, simply don't carry the weight and relevance of the actual full introduction of the character. That's why, decades later, one is more desired than the other.

 

Another solid example.

[Senormac]

Yes, anyone who can post to these boards is allowed to post that picture.

 

I probably should have asked "if someone would be kind enough to post a picture of......

 

to be more grammatically correct

[Senormac]

I took this many years ago. Comes in handy.

 

 

Thx for a great shot of this page

 

anyone have a shot of the Marvel Value Stamp page for this issue

[chrisco37]

stop guys your gonna make people with #181's start to pee

 

There should be some sort of Offical Comic Guide we could go off of that is put out my industry leaders and have like a tribunal about camel toes and 1st app.

 

why cant we change the industry for the better !

 

New 1st darkseid = Forever people 1

 

New 1st Wolverine = Hulk #180

 

etc. it seems we all know this but CGC doesn't .... huh go figure

 

 

CGC knows it just fine..... it's right there on the label.

 

 

 

This is interesting - I know there are other label notations of cameo appearances, but are there any other examples of "First appearance of [x] in cameo"?

 

I wonder whether this notation was created after the #181 notation started causing controversy, or whether they were both noted as such from the beginning. Anyone know?

 

 

 

Overstreet has carried the "1st app in cameo" and "1st full app" designations for several books for as long as I can remember.

 

Thanks. Any other examples for major characters? Is Venom one, like some people mentioned?

 

An interesting one is actually Galactus (FF#48). He only "appears" at the very end. However, the entire story revolves around him, so it has always been considered as the "1st appearance". I don't think OS or CGC make a note on 49 that it's the first "full appearance" even though he technically only appears at the very end of 48.

[comix4fun]

stop guys your gonna make people with #181's start to pee

 

There should be some sort of Offical Comic Guide we could go off of that is put out my industry leaders and have like a tribunal about camel toes and 1st app.

 

why cant we change the industry for the better !

 

New 1st darkseid = Forever people 1

 

New 1st Wolverine = Hulk #180

 

etc. it seems we all know this but CGC doesn't .... huh go figure

 

 

CGC knows it just fine..... it's right there on the label.

 

 

 

This is interesting - I know there are other label notations of cameo appearances, but are there any other examples of "First appearance of [x] in cameo"?

 

I wonder whether this notation was created after the #181 notation started causing controversy, or whether they were both noted as such from the beginning. Anyone know?

 

 

 

Overstreet has carried the "1st app in cameo" and "1st full app" designations for several books for as long as I can remember.

 

Thanks. Any other examples for major characters? Is Venom one, like some people mentioned?

 

 

I will go pull some old overstreets and see what they say. I came across it several times going back to the mid 80's guides.

[comix4fun]

stop guys your gonna make people with #181's start to pee

 

There should be some sort of Offical Comic Guide we could go off of that is put out my industry leaders and have like a tribunal about camel toes and 1st app.

 

why cant we change the industry for the better !

 

New 1st darkseid = Forever people 1

 

New 1st Wolverine = Hulk #180

 

etc. it seems we all know this but CGC doesn't .... huh go figure

 

 

CGC knows it just fine..... it's right there on the label.

 

 

 

This is interesting - I know there are other label notations of cameo appearances, but are there any other examples of "First appearance of [x] in cameo"?

 

I wonder whether this notation was created after the #181 notation started causing controversy, or whether they were both noted as such from the beginning. Anyone know?

 

 

 

Overstreet has carried the "1st app in cameo" and "1st full app" designations for several books for as long as I can remember.

 

Thanks. Any other examples for major characters? Is Venom one, like some people mentioned?

 

An interesting one is actually Galactus (FF#48). He only "appears" at the very end. However, the entire story revolves around him, so it has always been considered as the "1st appearance". I don't think OS or CGC make a note on 49 that it's the first "full appearance" even though he technically only appears at the very end of 48.

 

 

Yep, CGC called 48 "1st Silver Surfer & Galactus (Cameo last page)" and #49 is listed as "1st Full App. Galactus, 2nd App. Silver Surfer"

[Ditch Fahrenheit]

stop guys your gonna make people with #181's start to pee

 

There should be some sort of Offical Comic Guide we could go off of that is put out my industry leaders and have like a tribunal about camel toes and 1st app.

 

why cant we change the industry for the better !

 

New 1st darkseid = Forever people 1

 

New 1st Wolverine = Hulk #180

 

etc. it seems we all know this but CGC doesn't .... huh go figure

 

 

CGC knows it just fine..... it's right there on the label.

 

 

 

This is interesting - I know there are other label notations of cameo appearances, but are there any other examples of "First appearance of [x] in cameo"?

 

I wonder whether this notation was created after the #181 notation started causing controversy, or whether they were both noted as such from the beginning. Anyone know?

 

 

 

Overstreet has carried the "1st app in cameo" and "1st full app" designations for several books for as long as I can remember.

 

Thanks. Any other examples for major characters? Is Venom one, like some people mentioned?

 

An interesting one is actually Galactus (FF#48). He only "appears" at the very end. However, the entire story revolves around him, so it has always been considered as the "1st appearance". I don't think OS or CGC make a note on 49 that it's the first "full appearance" even though he technically only appears at the very end of 48.

 

That's a good one. From Overstreet:

 

FF48 - Partial origin/1st app. "The Silver Surfer & Galactus (3/66) by Lee & Kirby; Galactus brief app. in last panel; 1st of 3 part story.

 

FF49 - 2nd app./1st cover Silver Surfer & Galactus

 

FF52 - 1st app. The Black Panther (7/66)

 

Yep, CGC called 48 "1st Silver Surfer & Galactus (Cameo last page)" and #49 is listed as "1st Full App. Galactus, 2nd App. Silver Surfer"

 

 

 

 

Interesting differences between CGC and Overstreet.

[Screwy-migration]

I took this many years ago. Comes in handy.

 

 

Thx for a great shot of this page

 

anyone have a shot of the Marvel Value Stamp page for this issue

 

That's weird. I posted the last page last night, to put the final panel in context. Now I don't see it?

[comix4fun]

 

 

[Dr. Balls]

 

Looks like a first appearance to me.

 

Isn't the first appearance of Darkseid like that? Doesn't his face just appear on a TV screen on like the second to last panel?

 

yup a lot less than this ... but collectors buy that as his first ? its just his head also

 

Yeah, below is all you see. Forever People #1 should be considered the real first app.

 

 

Unfortunately though, it isn't.

The other book was released first. Simples.

I agree about Hulk #180, I think we all do. How the heck is that not Wolverines first appearance?" Cameo be blowed.

 

 

It is his first appearance...in cameo. I don't think anyone would call 180 a full appearance. It's a single panel teaser for the next issue.

 

+1

 

A "cameo" is a small part that stands out from the other parts of story/performance, etc. I think that definition supercedes the "first appearance" because it's a teaser panel for the next issue. There is no cut-and-dry definition that draws a line between the two, for everyone it's a matter of personal and religious belief to 180 being the first appearance or not.

 

However, if someone would like to purchase my incorrectly valued 180 in VG at the 181 VG price, please PM me and I will gladly sell you Wolverine's first appearance.

[Balham's Finest]

 

 

 

Interesting. Thanks for this!

[SilverAgeDreams]

OverStreet 1983

 

Hulk 180 - 1st Wolverine (cameo) Mint $6.00

Hulk 181 - Wolverine app. Mint $20.00

 

Even back then with that description 181 = worth more .... huh??

 

Jack X

 

 

[comix4fun]

OverStreet 1983

 

Hulk 180 - 1st Wolverine (cameo) Mint $6.00

Hulk 181 - Wolverine app. Mint $20.00

 

Even back then with that description 181 = worth more .... huh??

 

Jack X

 

 

 

You have to decide whether a single panel that's entirely out of the context of the rest of the story is worth more than the entire first story with that character and a great cover.

 

That little "cameo" is a euphemism for "not a whole hell of a lot" of appearance.

 

[Ryan.]

This seems like as good a place as any to ask this: Is anyone aware of a thread created somewhere on this board listing the Most Important Single Issue of Each Decade?

[bug33fouf]

I hear Marvel publishing is trying to make their bronze age back stock more "sale-able"...

 

 

 

Here's an idea.

 

 

 

 

 

[Bookery]

 

While the newbies argue over cameo/ full app. trivia, the seasoned collector will realize Hulk 180 should be the more valuable, as it's the 1st app. of Phtop.

 

 

[pemart1966]

I don't like the whole "in cameo" or "full appearance" thing. I understand that they are established descriptions by now and they're not going away. I just don't like them. But ultimately this is going to be an argument in semantics, anyway.

 

180 is Wolverine's first appearance. No other qualifier needed. First appearance.

 

181 is Wolverine's first story line and first appearance on the cover of a comic (a great cover). It is his second appearance, no other qualifier needed.

 

I think 181 will always sell for more, even if what I've written above were to become universally accepted, because I think that first cover appearance is that powerful. But I can see the gap in sales prices between the two, grades held equal, closing. Own both, that's the ticket.

 

Is Detective 26 considered to be Batman's first appearance?