• 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.

Do villain 1st appearances matter....

Started by Amin80,

67 posts in this topic

Amin80

Amin80

Posted
Posted

When it comes to the value of their 1st appearance comic value rising, is it even possible anymore. The reason I'm asking is because there will never be a standalone movie for those villains, except maybe Magneto and maybe even Venom, but I just can't see there being a trilogy of doctor octopus movies and so I don't think their first appearance comics will ever gain in value.

 

Looking at superheroes they would more likely continue to grow in value, for example amazing fantasy 15 and spiderman #1 continue to grow in value the more spiderman movies there are. I think even hulk 181 will continue to get more expensive with more Wolverine movies coming out. Even Dead Pool has the chance to become a very popular character. So my question is, isn't it wiser to put your money on the heroes 1st appearance issues rather than villains?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rip

Rip

Posted
Posted

I think some of the biggest villains FF5, Action Comics 23, Bats 1 etc. are some of your best bets in comics today. If you have a hero you need a someone to fight.

 

 

Makes me think of one of my favorite quotes:

 

"Show me a hero and I'll write you a tragedy."

― F. Scott Fitzgerald

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AlexanderM

AlexanderM

Posted
Posted
Yes.

But people can afford first appearances of Apocalypse, and even Venom.

 

Spider-man? Not so much.

 

This is the answer in a nut shell.

 

Super-heroes are of course the most valuable characters, but as prices increase and keep increasing some have turned to first appearances of villains also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Amin80

Amin80

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Ya no one wants the first appearance of Joker...

 

Joker is probably the one true exception given the brilliant portrayals done by Hammill, Nicholson and ledger, being the most recurring Bat villain and where some people actually like him more than Batman, but the others just don't rise to that kind of iconic status which the joker has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Amin80

Amin80

Posted
  • Author
Posted
So...a characters desirability and value is only tied to movies?? m1703.gif

 

 

No of course not, please keep in mind that I am only giving a theory, it may not be right, but is like to hear what people think on this issue. Movies and tv series help to spread the comic medium to people who have never read a comic, Spiderman is a brand and movies help to increase the brand value of a character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stanley1883

stanley1883

Posted
Posted

Heck yeah it matters, think top tier villains, like Joker, think of insanely popular ones like Harley Quinn, and think of long lasting characters that have even been "good guys" before like Poison Ivy. Yest first appearance of ANYONE relevant matters, friend or foe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dr. Balls

Dr. Balls

Posted
Posted
So...a characters desirability and value is only tied to movies?? m1703.gif

 

I don't think anyone said that. But movies do play a (big) part.

 

No one has to say it, but I think it's true. Why people think it's a bad thing is beyond me.

 

Movies expand awareness of the characters to audiences.

 

Audiences buy product related to characters, increasing the demand.

 

Character's appearances drive up the value of the books they are in.

 

Change 'Movies' to 'VIdeo Games' or 'Wizard Magazine' or any other form of media that reaches audiences outside the niche, and that's pretty much it in a nutshell either now or 30 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Amin80

Amin80

Posted
  • Author
Posted
So...a characters desirability and value is only tied to movies?? m1703.gif

 

I don't think anyone said that. But movies do play a (big) part.

 

No one has to say it, but I think it's true. Why people think it's a bad thing is beyond me.

 

Movies expand awareness of the characters to audiences.

 

Audiences buy product related to characters, increasing the demand.

 

Character's appearances drive up the value of the books they are in.

 

Change 'Movies' to 'VIdeo Games' or 'Wizard Magazine' or any other form of media that reaches audiences outside the niche, and that's pretty much it in a nutshell either now or 30 years ago.

 

I think Walking Dead is the perfect example of how a medium outside of comics can push the value of a comic especially the 1st issue, so do movies matter, I think it's safe to say yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
techvoodoo

techvoodoo

Posted
Posted
So...a characters desirability and value is only tied to movies?? m1703.gif

 

I don't think anyone said that. But movies do play a (big) part.

 

 

In the last several years, other than Movies/TV, what other factor have driven up (or down) the value of books significantly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wardevil0

wardevil0

Posted
Posted

I think villain first appearances are valuable in proportion to that villain's actual presence in the story. Take Spider-man and Kraven the Hunter, for example. How many issues of Amazing Spider-man, Spectacular Spider-man, Web of Spider-man, Marvel Knights Spider-man, Spider-man, Marvel Team-Up, and Marvel Tales featured Spider-man? 99.8%? How many of them featured Kraven?

 

A quick estimate from Marvel Chronology Project suggests Sergei Kravinoff has made only 60 appearances in various issues of the Marvel Universe.

 

Amazing Spider-man ran for 700 issues, Web of Spider-man ran for 129 issues, Peter Parker the Spectacular Spider-man ran for 263 issues. That's about 1100 issues already.

 

The first Kraven, ASM 15, is $2400 raw NM. (www.comicspriceguide.com)

The first Spider-man, AF 15, $140,000 raw NM.

 

ASM 15 is $400, or 18%, more expensive than ASM 16 which has a Daredevil crossover.

 

Despite Kraven's status as a classic Spidey villain, he really hasn't been around that much. Every issue has Spidey, but the villains rotate through so it's a lot harder to build a dedicated fanbase. Every Spidey fan has a favorite villain, but the interest is dispersed over a dozen or so top villains, whereas there's only one Spidey (and clones...).

 

Every appearance of a villain is also an appearance of a hero, so it's hard to tell what aspect makes it more desirable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wardevil0

wardevil0

Posted
Posted

I remember this price guide from 1992... movie hype from 22 years ago!

 

897735.jpg

 

current value of Lois Lane 70 (raw NM): $340

current value of Batman 155 (raw NM): $800

 

an increase of 4.5x and 5x respectively over the last two decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AlexanderM

AlexanderM

Posted
Posted
So...a characters desirability and value is only tied to movies?? m1703.gif

 

I don't think anyone said that. But movies do play a (big) part.

 

No one has to say it, but I think it's true. Why people think it's a bad thing is beyond me.

 

Movies expand awareness of the characters to audiences.

 

Audiences buy product related to characters, increasing the demand.

 

Character's appearances drive up the value of the books they are in.

 

Change 'Movies' to 'VIdeo Games' or 'Wizard Magazine' or any other form of media that reaches audiences outside the niche, and that's pretty much it in a nutshell either now or 30 years ago.

 

Completely agree.

 

I don't see why it would be a bad idea.

 

Except - "this is our hobby..and if the 'masses' get hold of it, then it is selling out/reducing it to something unclean (about money or market)"

 

We know this attitude from audiences of rock groups, art, and many other things...nothing new, but personally find it a little childish and don't agree with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spyder!

Spyder!

Posted
Posted
So...a characters desirability and value is only tied to movies?? m1703.gif

 

I don't think anyone said that. But movies do play a (big) part.

 

No one has to say it, but I think it's true. Why people think it's a bad thing is beyond me.

 

Movies expand awareness of the characters to audiences.

 

Audiences buy product related to characters, increasing the demand.

 

Character's appearances drive up the value of the books they are in.

 

Change 'Movies' to 'VIdeo Games' or 'Wizard Magazine' or any other form of media that reaches audiences outside the niche, and that's pretty much it in a nutshell either now or 30 years ago.

 

The price of anything comes from just 2 sources: Supply and Demand.

 

Dr. Balls is right, movies are one way in which demand is increased, by increasing the number of buyers in the market. This is certainly not exclusive to movies. Lots of things can cause demand to rise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wardevil0

wardevil0

Posted
Posted

I think part of the problem is that comic values used to be determined by what issues featured a popular character, or what issues had a popular writer or artist, or what issue had a first appearance/death/etc. All of these aspects pertained to the contents of the comic and its position in the overall sequential storyline.

 

Comic values today seem to be based on rumors of a TV show/movie (any Image book that is touted as next Walking Dead), or just internet propaganda (Scalped 16 or 43). Sometimes before issues even ship. This is frustrating for people who want comic fans to buy comics and read them and continue buying comics, vs people who buy books expected to be big future value hits.

 

We've lost lots of good, well-written and drawn comics to low sales because no one bought multiple copies to hoard for flipping.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing