whats up with cameos? 0

[grayzr]

Why are some cameos worth more then full appearances and vise versa?

The one example I can come up with is Darkseid and Wolverine.

Why is Jimmy Olsen 134 more important/valuable then forever people 1 when hulk 180 is worth less then 181?

I know Darkseid had more cameos leading up to FP #1 but why is JO #134 considered more important and valuable? especially when his cameo is literally him on a small computer screen.

If there is any other examples of stuff like JO #134 I would be interested to see but as of now its the only example of this I can find.

 

 

Jimmy Olsen #134

Incredible Hulk #180

Edited May 5, 2017 by grayzr

[lizards2]

I always wondered what was up with FP #1.  Now I know.

[jcjames]

The market has spoken!  

 

btw... has there ever been a reversal (or a "retcon") of the market's decision regarding 1st Appearance/Cameo? IOW, has there ever been a case where second-fiddle 1st-cameo like IH180 eventually became more valuable than the market-established 1st choice? 

 

 

[Brian48]

I've come up with my own nonsensical pattern to explaining it.  If a character appears in a series of cameos first before having a full appearance, it's usually his first cameo that is viewed as the key collectable issue.  If a character has a full appearance immediately after *one* brief cameo, then it's the first full appearance that gets the attention of collectors.  It's almost as if the multiple cameo appearances confuses the hell out of people or the more cameos you have, it invalidates the first full appearance.  

And then you have characters in books where it's arguable whether it's a cameo or 1st appearance (i.e. Red Sonja)

[Lazyboy]

2 hours ago, grayzr said:

Why are some cameos worth more then full appearances and vise versa?

The one example I can come up with is Darkseid and Wolverine.

Why is Jimmy Olsen 134 more important/valuable then forever people 1 when hulk 180 is worth less then 181?

I know Darkseid had more cameos leading up to FP #1 but why is JO #134 considered more important and valuable? especially when his cameo is literally him on a small computer screen.

If there is any other examples of stuff like JO #134 I would be interested to see but as of now its the only example of this I can find.

We just discussed this at the beginning of the year. Although that wasn't really the intention of the OP.

Who said SPJO 134 was considered more important? Value and importance are not the same thing.

[ADAMANTIUM]

Is the first appearance of Mary Jane disputed/value confirmed/market determined?? Basically I know that she has a few cameos but I didn't know if there was one more "value"ed more than others, any help appreciated...

[oakman29]

I was always confused with Gambit. In the Annual he is in 17 panels, that doesn't seem to be a cameo at all!

So why is X Men 266 the book to be anointed as 1st app.

[grayzr]

1 hour ago, Lazyboy said:

We just discussed this at the beginning of the year. Although that wasn't really the intention of the OP.

Who said SPJO 134 was considered more important? Value and importance are not the same thing.

I would assume if something has more value then its more important. 

Isn't that logical?

Can you provide an example of something related to something else that holds less significance but at the same time holds more value?

Edited May 5, 2017 by grayzr

[Lazyboy]

1 minute ago, grayzr said:

I would assume if something has more value then its more important. 

Isn't that logical?

It's more logical to actually read the link provided before responding. That point is addressed in the thread.

[grayzr]

9 minutes ago, Lazyboy said:

It's more logical to actually read the link provided before responding. That point is addressed in the thread.

where in the link does it explain an example of something related to something else that holds less significance but at the same time holds more value?

[Lazyboy]

2 minutes ago, grayzr said:

where in the link does it explain an example of something related to something else that holds less significance but at the same time holds more value?

The first post on page 3.

[grayzr]

origins are a tricky topic though, At one time from my understanding they where almost as valuable as the first appearance. (eta nick talks about it in one of his videos)

This has changed significantly in todays market.

[kav]

I learned from antiques roadshow value is based on 4 factors-rarity, significance, demand, condition.  A drawing by Picasso is arguably more significant that ASM 300 OA, but it is worth much less.

[grayzr]

3 minutes ago, kav said:

I learned from antiques roadshow value is based on 4 factors-rarity, significance, demand, condition.  A drawing by Picasso is arguably more significant that ASM 300 OA, but it is worth much less.

What is that variation of asm 300?

Never heard of it before.

Edited May 5, 2017 by grayzr

[Lazyboy]

1 minute ago, kav said:

I learned from antiques roadshow value is based on 4 factors-rarity, significance, demand, condition.  A drawing by Picasso is arguably more significant that ASM 300 OA, but it is worth much less.

That's overly complicating it. Significance affects demand and rarity and condition are both just supply issues.

It's ultimately just Supply and Demand.

[kav]

1 minute ago, Lazyboy said:

That's overly complicating it. Significance affects demand and rarity and condition are both just supply issues.

It's ultimately just Supply and Demand.

You can have something rare, significant, and in great condition not worth squat.  Demand is one of the 4 elements of value.  Demand alone vs supply does not equate value.  Crack cocaine could be in high demand and no one has any to sell but that does not mean someone will pay $50,000 for a crack rock.

[kav]

Also merely saying it's 'supply vs demand' does not offer any useful information.  

"Why is action #1 worth so much?"
"Because there's a limited supply and a lot of demand"
"But WHY is there a demand??"
"Because people want it"

vs:

"Because it is the first superhero book and the first superman-that makes it significant.  It's very rare-only 100 copies.  There are hundreds of thousands of comic collectors and they all want this book.  This copy is in excellent condition which makes it worth more."

 

Edited May 5, 2017 by kav

[Lazyboy]

7 minutes ago, kav said:

You can have something rare, significant, and in great condition not worth squat.

If it's significant, there will be demand. Name one item that is rare and significant and worthless in great condition.

4 minutes ago, kav said:

Also merely saying it's 'supply vs demand' does not offer any useful information.  

"Why is action #1 worth so much?"
"Because there's a limited supply and a lot of demand"
"But WHY is there a demand??"
"Because people want it"

Why demand exists is a completely different topic and irrelevant to value. Knowing why may help you predict the future value, but it doesn't matter in the present.

[jcjames]

2 hours ago, oakman29 said:

I was always confused with Gambit. In the Annual he is in 17 panels, that doesn't seem to be a cameo at all!

So why is X Men 266 the book to be anointed as 1st app.

I don't have Annual14, but is he really in it that much? Does he speak or interact with others or identified?

Obviously XM266 benefits from the cover, he's front and center of focus, and he's introduced by name all right there.

 

[kav]

8 minutes ago, Lazyboy said:

If it's significant, there will be demand. Name one item that is rare and significant and worthless in great condition.

A section of Einstein's brain.

Edited May 5, 2017 by kav