Is this a Counterfeit comic? 1 1

[Fernando1195]

So I got this comic online, and in the pictures it looked OK but when it came I notice some details that made me doubt about it. I'm actually not a very experimented collector (I have like 5 months collecting) so I need some help. The comic is supposed to be new, but the spine looks like peeled and the staples are not common. Thanks =)

[FN-2199]

I'm not familiar with this virgin cover so I didn't look it up but...

I don't see any tell tale signs from your pictures. The staples appear to line up with the indentations. In any case, replaced staples are not counterfeiting, rather, restoration. Sometimes, folks have pulled the staples and added extra covers for the multiple-cover-collecting crowd. That's more of a "Frankenbook" not a counterfeit. If you have one cover, I would't worry about staple replacement. The wear/color loss along the spine is common among moderns. 

The only forged "comics" post 1980 that I recall being discussed and counterfeited are Gobbledygook and The Good Morty. Both are truly obscure. 

[JollyComics]

Experimented or experienced?

[Not A Clone]

What comic is this? 

[steveinthecity]

4 hours ago, Not A Clone said:

What comic is this? 

Looks like an Astonishing X-Men #1 variant cover.

[RockMyAmadeus]

22 hours ago, FN-2199 said:

The only forged "comics" post 1980 that I recall being discussed and counterfeited are Gobbledygook and The Good Morty. Both are truly obscure. 

There have been a couple more...TMNT #1 and #2, Cry For Dawn #1, and maybe a handful of others.

The Good Morty, however, I'm still unconvinced. The spastics on the CBCS board, in their inability to discuss things rationally, kept jumping up and down and shouting that this was "definitely" a counterfeit ("two staples vs. one staple!!"), with absolutely zero evidence, and ignoring basic reason, like the fact that there would have been no incentive for the supposed "counterfeiters" to do so prior to the booklet "becoming valuable." In the entire history of counterfeited comics, nobody has ever conclusively counterfeited a book with no value. The usual suspects...CFD #1, TMNT #1 and #2, Gobbledygook, Cerebus #1...were all done precisely because the originals HAD value. Counterfeiting a valueless item....as "The Good Morty" was when the supposed "counterfeiting" was to have been done...is a colossal waste of time and expense, on the off-chance that such an item might become valuable. 

"Perhaps it was a test case, to see if they could do it well!" - again...someone can "test case" a book with value, IF their intent is genuine counterfeiting. Why pick a random insert in a random cartoon DVD that had no value? And, this supposed "counterfeiting" is so well done, no one is able to tell for sure after the fact...?

I don't have any concrete answers, but as far as I can tell, nobody else does, either. My opinion, then and now, is that these booklets were simply reprinted, perhaps under a foreign license, because they ran out of "originals", but still wanted to include them in the DVD package. Reprints happen in publishing all the time, and often without bothering to note it's a reprint...because in publishing, no one cares about "collectible" concerns. Why note it on a throwaway parody booklet as a bonus in a DVD package..?