1st Wolverine art @ $140K with 22 days to go!! 0

[delekkerste]

For those interested, we've been talking about the Hulk #180 page for the past couple of months in the OA forum:

 

Heritage May 2014/Hulk #180 page thread

[techtre2003]

It's better if you see a Pollock in person.

The size really adds to the experience.

 

+1

 

Here's a picture of me at MoMA back in 2004 in front of a Pollock:

 

I do like that one much more than the one I posted; and I can agree the size makes it more impressive. I still don't "get it" though To each their own I guess (thumbs u

[B-Smooth]

Just curious as to why you think that. I just don't understand how this is worth 140 Mil.

 

 

The short answer is that, you may not understand it, but people with real money do. Do you not like/appreciate the art or is it just the price that you find egregious? I'll be the first to agree that $140 million for almost anything is nutty, but the art itself is beyond reproach. It's mesmerizing, innovative, iconic and historically significant in a way that the 1st appearance of Wolverine could never be - centuries of painting technique and composition turned on its head.

 

As for the price, when you have billionaires competing for so little of the great stuff, sometimes you need to get to $140 million to achieve price discrimination. Like I said, I think paying that much for a painting is pretty nuts. But it would be less nuts to me than seeing that Hulk #180 page sell for 7-figures.

 

Both. I've never understood "art" that simply looks like someone threw some paint at a canvas. I mean, I could create something like that but I couldn't draw Wolverine You say it's mesmerizing, innovative, and iconic. I say any old hack could do the same thing!

 

The fact that "people with real money" understand the art makes the whole thing even more laughable to me. And that's not meant as a jab at you; I've heard that argument before. I don't have a ton of money myself so I think it's silly to spend 10s of thousands on a comicbook. Now if I had money to burn I'm sure I'd feel different. However, I don't care how much money I had, I wouldn't spend a dime on some of the art that's sold for millions.

 

72.8 million - Really?

 

Looks like an ice cream sandwich. Anyhow, the money thing aside, I just don't get the appeal of Pollock's work. If it had no real monetary value, and was just a painting on a wall, I'd have that monstrosity removed from my house. I respect all peoples opinions, but it's just my opinion that my 5 year old son with a couple of buckets of paint and a brush could make the same thing.

Edited April 24, 2014 by Paper Airplane

[Jaydogrules]

yep the very first true app of Wolverine

 

That tiny little cameo? It's nothing, not even worth mentioning. It isn't like you can really tell it's Wolverine, or he says his name, or interacts with the characters...

 

 

 

 

-slym

 

This is Cameo

 

 

Anyway the day i will own a 181 maybe i will think different

 

 

Yes indeed, that too is a cameo.

 

-J.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Yeah, it really is. It is the first depiction of arguably the 4th most popular superhero in the world.

 

We'll see where it ends up.

 

It may be the first depiction, but it's not the most important one. The Hulk #181 cover and the GSXM #1 cover are both more significant. Hulk #180 may be where Wolverine first appeared, but X-Men is what made him a star (and the X-Men franchise is more popular than Wolverine alone).

 

I own the OA to the very first Gwen Stacy appearance in ASM #31, but it's not worth as much as, say, the cover to ASM #121 or 122 and probably not as much as some random Romita covers which feature her as well. I also own the OA to Red Sonja's very first panels in comics from Conan #23, but it's not worth as much as the Conan #24 cover or most of the interiors; heck, there's probably at least 1 or 2 #23 pages worth more as well. No, I'm not comparing Gwen Stacy and Red Sonja to Wolverine, but I am dispelling the myth that first appearance trumps everything else - it doesn't. This is the art world and there are numerous other factors which come into play - cover vs. splash vs. interior, content of the page, execution of the page, etc.

 

Fact is, Wolverine's second appearance on the cover of Hulk #181 is bigger, better and more significant, and probably would fetch $1 million. And, by the transitive property, if the (superior) cover is worth about a million, this page isn't.

 

Comparing Gwen Stacy's first appearance with Wolverine's, even by way of analogy, is where we take leave of our senses.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

There are numerous examples of where the cover of the 2nd appearance is/would be worth more than any panel page from the first appearance, e.g.:

 

1st Red Sonja - Conan #23 vs. cover of Conan #24

1st Gambit - X-Men Annual #14 vs. cover of Uncanny X-Men #266

1st Elektra - Marvel house ad/Comics Journal cover vs. cover of Daredevil #168

1st Wolverine - Hulk #180 vs. cover of Hulk #181

 

Don't get me wrong - the Hulk #180 page is a great page and could set a record for an interior page (the DKR #3 splash will be tough to beat, though some here seem to think it will easily do more than double that ). Talk of 7-figure price tags and hyperbole about it being the most significant OA of the last 40 years by outsiders to the OA market are just that - hyperbole by people who don't really know the OA market and its players.

 

Oh boy.

 

You make some very odd comparisons.

 

Hulk #180/181 is a very special case, and not at all related to Conan #23/24, X-Men Annual #14/266, or...ads? Really?

 

In any event, the debate about Wolverine's first appearance has been around...as I'm sure you're well aware...for decades. The market has decided that #181 is the more valuable appearance, but there is no character in all of comics...with the possible exception of the Spectre's first appearances in More Fun #51-52...whose first "real" appearance is more debated than Wolverine.

 

X-Men Annual #14 has never carried a premium (or "premium"), ever, despite many attempts by many people to convince the market otherwise. Conan #23/24 have been looked at as a matched set. And I don't think I've ever seen anyone who has made an argument for ads being Elektra's first appearance before your post here.

[delekkerste]

There are numerous examples of where the cover of the 2nd appearance is/would be worth more than any panel page from the first appearance, e.g.:

 

1st Red Sonja - Conan #23 vs. cover of Conan #24

1st Gambit - X-Men Annual #14 vs. cover of Uncanny X-Men #266

1st Elektra - Marvel house ad/Comics Journal cover vs. cover of Daredevil #168

1st Wolverine - Hulk #180 vs. cover of Hulk #181

 

Don't get me wrong - the Hulk #180 page is a great page and could set a record for an interior page (the DKR #3 splash will be tough to beat, though some here seem to think it will easily do more than double that ). Talk of 7-figure price tags and hyperbole about it being the most significant OA of the last 40 years by outsiders to the OA market are just that - hyperbole by people who don't really know the OA market and its players.

 

Oh boy.

 

You make some very odd comparisons.

 

Hulk #180/181 is a very special case, and not at all related to Conan #23/24, X-Men Annual #14/266, or...ads? Really?

 

In any event, the debate about Wolverine's first appearance has been around...as I'm sure you're well aware...for decades. The market has decided that #181 is the more valuable appearance, but there is no character in all of comics...with the possible exception of the Spectre's first appearances in More Fun #51-52...whose first "real" appearance is more debated than Wolverine.

 

X-Men Annual #14 has never carried a premium (or "premium"), ever, despite many attempts by many people to convince the market otherwise. Conan #23/24 have been looked at as a matched set. And I don't think I've ever seen anyone who has made an argument for ads being Elektra's first appearance before your post here.

 

Hulk #180-181 is absolutely comparable to the others, especially Conan #23-24. The latter is a "matched set"? I don't know anyone who considers them to be such but not Hulk #180-181. It's frankly not a bad characterization, but, I'd argue that it would apply to Hulk #180-181 and FF #48-50 too. Speaking of which, is there anyone who thinks the first Surfer page or the first Galactus page from FF #48 would be more important and desirable than the cover to FF #49? This ain't the comic book world, this is the OA world, where a one-month difference in publication date does not trump other considerations like content, art quality, cover vs. interior, iconic and memorable image vs. not iconic image, etc.

 

At the end of the day, 1st appearance is just one consideration out of many for OA collectors. In fact, I happen to collect 1st appearance artwork - I have pages or covers from the first appearance issues of Blade, Vampirella, Michonne, Gwen Stacy, Harry Osborn, Prof. Warren, Elektra, Bullseye, Vindicator, MODOK and others - so I actually know what I'm talking about.

 

BTW, this Marvel house ad (also doubling as the cover to an issue of The Comics Journal) preceded the publication of Daredevil #168 by months and features a better Elektra image (a good friend of mine owns it). So, yeah...ads.

[Mr Pristine-migration]

Too bad about the personalization on the autograph. Hopefully it's in pencil

[Jaydogrules]

seriously $1 million??!!

 

that'd be amazing

 

id say 300-400k

 

I'm with you. I don't really see it breaking $400k either, and anywhere near that would be a phenomenal result for the consignor.

 

-J.

[RockMyAmadeus]

By the way....Pollock's appeal is because he is Pollock, not because his art is superior to anything done before.

 

Picasso's work is fascinating, but his earlier work, before he delved into surrealism and cubism, is why he is "Picasso." Had Picasso turned out work only like his later styles, it is doubtful he would be as famous (although that's up for debate.) But many of his most valuable pieces are from his impressionist pieces of the early 20th century, which are breathtaking masterpieces ("Garcon a la pipe", for example.) Picasso was a master at surrealism...but he made his name as a realist, classicist, and impressionist.

 

(Granted, it's hard to really make many speculations about Picasso, he is probably the most talented painter who ever lived. It is difficult to overstate his talent.)

 

It is the NAME that provokes the hundreds of millions, not (necessarily) the merit of the work itself. In 20th and 21st century art, it has become a competition to own names, rather than masterpieces for the sake of themselves. The pieces have "superstar value" because of the NAME, not the work's artistic value in and of itself.

 

Monet is valuable because it is Monet, the same with Cezanne, the same with Dali, the same with Pollock and Warhol.

 

These artists obviously were masters, because of what they achieved, but the real stratosphere in value occurs because of the name involved.

 

Van Gogh, for example, did not support himself very well with his work, and sold only one painting during his lifetime (for about 80 2014 dollars), despite gaining some modicum of notoriety in gallery exhibitions in the late 1880's. His brother supported him.

 

But after his death, and because of the circumstances of his life, his work became sought after, and gained fame because of what it was: a work by THE Vincent Van Gogh.

 

The work is genius, no doubt. But there are plenty of artists who were just as talented as Van Gogh, whose work is valued much less....because they are not "Van Gogh" (Gauguin, for example.)

 

But because of the circumstances, tragedy, and madness of Van Gogh's life, his work became highly sought after. What changed in between 1888 and 1905? Van Gogh exhibited in galleries; those interested in his work could certainly have made an offer on his work, and I doubt he would have turned it down. But they did not. After all, his work ended with his death in 1890, so it's not as if he didn't display his work while he was alive. So, what changed?

 

Answer: he died, and his life was a soap opera. He was a master, but few recognized it until he was dead. And once he was dead, the work became fixed and finite, and as his fame grew, so did the value of his work, until his name became the most valuable part of the price tag.

[Bronty]

There are numerous examples of where the cover of the 2nd appearance is/would be worth more than any panel page from the first appearance, e.g.:

 

1st Red Sonja - Conan #23 vs. cover of Conan #24

1st Gambit - X-Men Annual #14 vs. cover of Uncanny X-Men #266

1st Elektra - Marvel house ad/Comics Journal cover vs. cover of Daredevil #168

1st Wolverine - Hulk #180 vs. cover of Hulk #181

 

Don't get me wrong - the Hulk #180 page is a great page and could set a record for an interior page (the DKR #3 splash will be tough to beat, though some here seem to think it will easily do more than double that ). Talk of 7-figure price tags and hyperbole about it being the most significant OA of the last 40 years by outsiders to the OA market are just that - hyperbole by people who don't really know the OA market and its players.

 

Oh boy.

 

You make some very odd comparisons.

 

Hulk #180/181 is a very special case, and not at all related to Conan #23/24, X-Men Annual #14/266, or...ads? Really?

 

In any event, the debate about Wolverine's first appearance has been around...as I'm sure you're well aware...for decades. The market has decided that #181 is the more valuable appearance, but there is no character in all of comics...with the possible exception of the Spectre's first appearances in More Fun #51-52...whose first "real" appearance is more debated than Wolverine.

 

X-Men Annual #14 has never carried a premium (or "premium"), ever, despite many attempts by many people to convince the market otherwise. Conan #23/24 have been looked at as a matched set. And I don't think I've ever seen anyone who has made an argument for ads being Elektra's first appearance before your post here.

 

Forget all that. Logic, or rather logical arguments based on comparatives (flawed or not) don't matter when the buyer pool is like, three people. The real question is - who's going to write the cheque? Look around at the deeper pocketed OA collectors. The biggest cheques that have been written that are widely known anyways are around a half mil, in that ballpark. Is this particular page the hill any of the OA guys are going to die on, so much so that they will double what they've (or perhaps I should just say "he has") been paying ? I doubt it. If I'm that guy or those guys I'm not killing myself over this page when 181 is out there. I'll bid strongly on it, but that's it.

 

MORE IMPORTANTLY, I've already pushed and probably REGRET pushing, the price ceiling on key pieces. Am I willing to pay $1m for this piece knowing its going to cost me every single time I make another key purchase? I pay $1m now - and every single big piece after this one is going to be priced at seven figures because the wolverine page sold for that I'm not going to shoot myself in the foot by paying a million.

 

Paying a million doesn't cost the usual suspects one million. It costs them SEVERAL million because the landscape changes.

[RockMyAmadeus]

 

Hulk #180-181 is absolutely comparable to the others, especially Conan #23-24. The latter is a "matched set"? I don't know anyone who considers them to be such but not Hulk #180-181. It's frankly not a bad characterization, but, I'd argue that it would apply to Hulk #180-181 and FF #48-50 too. Speaking of which, is there anyone who thinks the first Surfer page or the first Galactus page from FF #48 would be more important and desirable than the cover to FF #49? This ain't the comic book world, this is the OA world, where a one-month difference in publication date does not trump other considerations like content, art quality, cover vs. interior, iconic and memorable image vs. not iconic image, etc.

 

FF #50 is going to be "the Surfer" piece, since he appears on the cover of #48 not at all, and is secondary to the cover of #49.

 

At the end of the day, 1st appearance is just one consideration out of many for OA collectors. In fact, I happen to collect 1st appearance artwork - I have pages or covers from the first appearance issues of Blade, Vampirella, Michonne, Gwen Stacy, Harry Osborn, Prof. Warren, Elektra, Bullseye, Vindicator, MODOK and others - so I actually know what I'm talking about.

 

Huh. Interesting! I didn't know that owning something made one knowledgeable about it.

 

 

First appearance is definitely just one consideration. OA is not a complete comic book; they are markedly different animals. OA is a single page, a single strip, a single cover. Composition, layout, technique, popularity of the characters on the page, personal taste, level of preservation are all factors, among others.

 

But all of that is trumped by importance in certain cases. It is the very first depiction of Wolverine (that was published), and it is that phrase..."first depiction of Wolverine" (most notably "Wolverine") which takes a piece like this out of regular considerations.

 

BTW, this Marvel house ad (also doubling as the cover to an issue of The Comics Journal) preceded the publication of Daredevil #168 by months and features a better Elektra image (a good friend of mine owns it). So, yeah...ads.

 

"Better" is subjective. I'll argue for the composition of #168 all day. You may value the OA to the ad higher than many, but I seriously doubt you'll convince others that it is more valuable, or even approaching in value.

[RockMyAmadeus]

There are numerous examples of where the cover of the 2nd appearance is/would be worth more than any panel page from the first appearance, e.g.:

 

1st Red Sonja - Conan #23 vs. cover of Conan #24

1st Gambit - X-Men Annual #14 vs. cover of Uncanny X-Men #266

1st Elektra - Marvel house ad/Comics Journal cover vs. cover of Daredevil #168

1st Wolverine - Hulk #180 vs. cover of Hulk #181

 

Don't get me wrong - the Hulk #180 page is a great page and could set a record for an interior page (the DKR #3 splash will be tough to beat, though some here seem to think it will easily do more than double that ). Talk of 7-figure price tags and hyperbole about it being the most significant OA of the last 40 years by outsiders to the OA market are just that - hyperbole by people who don't really know the OA market and its players.

 

Oh boy.

 

You make some very odd comparisons.

 

Hulk #180/181 is a very special case, and not at all related to Conan #23/24, X-Men Annual #14/266, or...ads? Really?

 

In any event, the debate about Wolverine's first appearance has been around...as I'm sure you're well aware...for decades. The market has decided that #181 is the more valuable appearance, but there is no character in all of comics...with the possible exception of the Spectre's first appearances in More Fun #51-52...whose first "real" appearance is more debated than Wolverine.

 

X-Men Annual #14 has never carried a premium (or "premium"), ever, despite many attempts by many people to convince the market otherwise. Conan #23/24 have been looked at as a matched set. And I don't think I've ever seen anyone who has made an argument for ads being Elektra's first appearance before your post here.

 

Forget all that. Logic, or rather logical arguments based on comparatives (flawed or not) don't matter when the buyer pool is like, three people. The real question is - who's going to write the cheque? Look around at the deeper pocketed OA collectors. The biggest cheques that have been written that are widely known anyways are around a half mil, in that ballpark. Is this particular page the hill any of the OA guys are going to die on, so much so that they will double what they've (or perhaps I should just say "he has") been paying ? I doubt it. If I'm that guy or those guys I'm not killing myself over this page when 181 is out there. I'll bid strongly on it, but that's it.

 

MORE IMPORTANTLY, I've already pushed and probably REGRET pushing, the price ceiling on key pieces. Am I willing to pay $1m for this piece knowing its going to cost me every single time I make another key purchase? I pay $1m now - and every single big piece after this one is going to be priced at seven figures because the wolverine page sold for that I'm not going to shoot myself in the foot by paying a million.

 

Paying a million doesn't cost the usual suspects one million. It costs them SEVERAL million because the landscape changes.

 

Absolutely, 100% agree. It absolutely sets a new benchmark, something I consider frequently. "Well, you were willing to pay $X for this, so why not for that?" It absolutely happens in art, in coins, and all sorts of collectibles fields, and it happens up and down the scale. When people have something that someone paid some crazy price for, all of a sudden the value of the item goes up in their minds, whether it is justified or not (and mostly not.)

 

"Well, SOMEONE paid $10,000 for my New Mutants #37 9.6, so mine must be worth that, too!"

 

I understand the phenomenon, especially in markets where few or single examples are available.

[delekkerste]

Forget all that. Logic, or rather logical arguments based on comparatives (flawed or not) don't matter when the buyer pool is like, three people. The real question is - who's going to write the cheque? Look around at the deeper pocketed OA collectors. The biggest cheques that have been written that are widely known anyways are around a half mil, in that ballpark. Is this particular page the hill any of the OA guys are going to die on, so much so that they will double what they've (or perhaps I should just say "he has") been paying ? I doubt it. If I'm that guy or those guys I'm not killing myself over this page when 181 is out there. I'll bid strongly on it, but that's it.

 

Yeah, no one has written a million dollar check yet for a single piece of US comic art, and it's hard to believe that an interior page is going to be the first. The Hulk #181 cover or a great Ditko Spidey cover I could believe, but iconic covers like ASM 50, Silver Surfer 4, Dark Knight Returns 1, etc. have all changed hands in the past year or so at lower levels so it would be pretty surprising to see this page sell for double or so what some of these other covers have allegedly sold for.

 

It's funny to see people who aren't dialed into the market at all voicing opinions that go against what both seasoned collectors and dealers alike are predicting for this page.

[Aman619]

Just curious as to why you think that. I just don't understand how this is worth 140 Mil.

 

 

The short answer is that, you may not understand it, but people with real money do. Do you not like/appreciate the art or is it just the price that you find egregious? I'll be the first to agree that $140 million for almost anything is nutty, but the art itself is beyond reproach. It's mesmerizing, innovative, iconic and historically significant in a way that the 1st appearance of Wolverine could never be - centuries of painting technique and composition turned on its head.

 

As for the price, when you have billionaires competing for so little of the great stuff, sometimes you need to get to $140 million to achieve price discrimination. Like I said, I think paying that much for a painting is pretty nuts. But it would be less nuts to me than seeing that Hulk #180 page sell for 7-figures.

 

Both. I've never understood "art" that simply looks like someone threw some paint at a canvas. I mean, I could create something like that but I couldn't draw Wolverine You say it's mesmerizing, innovative, and iconic. I say any old hack could do the same thing!

 

The fact that "people with real money" understand the art makes the whole thing even more laughable to me. And that's not meant as a jab at you; I've heard that argument before. I don't have a ton of money myself so I think it's silly to spend 10s of thousands on a comicbook. Now if I had money to burn I'm sure I'd feel different. However, I don't care how much money I had, I wouldn't spend a dime on some of the art that's sold for millions.

 

72.8 million - Really?

 

Looks like an ice cream sandwich. Anyhow, the money thing aside, I just don't get the appeal of Pollock's work. If it had no real monetary value, and was just a painting on a wall, I'd have that monstrosity removed from my house. I respect all peoples opinions, but it's just my opinion that my 5 year old son with a couple of buckets of paint and a brush could make the same thing.

 

haha. this always makes me laugh. I once got a job from a guy wanting to sell knock off Leroy Nieman style posters. I figured (like you did) that its all drips and splashes that look like sports figures, but not real painting like I was doing.

 

after an entire day trying, and getting nowhere, I gave up and never called the guy back.

 

 

Same idea with Pollack. When you stand there and take in it, you see the layering, and the depth, and you see that the paint while being "splattered" which anyone of us can do, was CAREFULLY splattered, spaced out beautifully, allowing the different colors to work with each other. Closest description I can think of would be looking at winter tree branches of many layers of trees overlapping, forming a mesmerizingly perfect latticework.

 

anyway, as Gene says, the prices they get are ridiculous except viewed thru the prism of guy with 1000x that much money fighting over bragging rights for owning whats out there that the other guys covet too.

 

Im not a huge Pollack fan, and for many years agreed that it was silly if not simple stuff. But one day by chance I was in front of one and I suddenly got it. My eyes were darting all around the canvas and having fun soaking it in.

 

 

and seriously, YOUR KID COULD NEVER PAINT IT. He could paint HIS work 1000x times better than Pollack could paint your kids work, though. So thats something to be proud of!

[RockMyAmadeus]

Forget all that. Logic, or rather logical arguments based on comparatives (flawed or not) don't matter when the buyer pool is like, three people. The real question is - who's going to write the cheque? Look around at the deeper pocketed OA collectors. The biggest cheques that have been written that are widely known anyways are around a half mil, in that ballpark. Is this particular page the hill any of the OA guys are going to die on, so much so that they will double what they've (or perhaps I should just say "he has") been paying ? I doubt it. If I'm that guy or those guys I'm not killing myself over this page when 181 is out there. I'll bid strongly on it, but that's it.

 

Yeah, no one has written a million dollar check yet for a single piece of US comic art, and it's hard to believe that an interior page is going to be the first. The Hulk #181 cover or a great Ditko Spidey cover I could believe, but iconic covers like ASM 50, Silver Surfer 4, Dark Knight Returns 1, etc. have all changed hands in the past year or so at lower levels so it would be pretty surprising to see this page sell for double or so what some of these other covers have allegedly sold for.

 

It's funny to see people who aren't dialed into the market at all voicing opinions that go against what both seasoned collectors and dealers alike are predicting for this page.

 

You know, you really can make your points without telling others they have no idea what they're talking about.

 

How about I go through our Wolverine discussion and point out the many, many, many mistakes you made during the course of the conversation...?

 

I didn't, because it didn't advance the conversation, but I could have. You made comments that were factually, demonstrably, provably wrong, multiple times, and on the few points you were corrected, you weren't told that you had no idea what you were talking about.

 

The whole "you had to be there, or you couldn't possibly know" was one of the most glaring.

 

 

If the page sells for a million, that doesn't prove me right. If it sells for $300K, it doesn't prove *you* right. You keep arguing subjectives as fact.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Hey Bronty...the Spidey #328 page, where was it at at three weeks before the auction went live? That would be a most interesting bit of information.

 

[delekkerste]

Huh. Interesting! I didn't know that owning something made one knowledgeable about it.

 

It doesn't, in and of itself. But, when you're as active in the hobby as I am, particularly this segment of the market, I can speak from a position of experience and authority. What are your OA credentials, sir?

 

 

"Better" is subjective. I'll argue for the composition of #168 all day. You may value the OA to the ad higher than many, but I seriously doubt you'll convince others that it is more valuable, or even approaching in value.

 

Thanks for proving my point. It's not more valuable even though it was the first appearance, because the #168 cover is the image that everyone remembers, much as everyone knows the Hulk #181 cover by heart but many couldn't tell you what the last page of #180 looked like without reference until this page turned up. Most important OA of the last 40 years?

[bronze_rules]

I read somewhere that Hulk 328 sold for $600k.

Does anyone have any sort of timeline reconstruction of the bidding?

 

At first, I might think that an interior piece would be incomparable, but after seeing an interior page of DKR went for $450k, I could easily see this piece going for 500k+

 

A better debate might be the value of that DKR page over say, the hulk 180 page.

DKR was more of a full pinup, but the significance and cultural popularity of Wolverine (coupled with some very deep pocketed investors with money seeking to diversify --)

far exceeds that IMO.

 

My bet is it exceeds 400K.

Edited April 24, 2014 by bronze_rules

[MrBedrock]

What are your OA credentials, sir?

"Well what have you got, sonny boy?"

Edited April 24, 2014 by MrBedrock