Why don’t grading companies/collectors consider Marvel Age 97 the first appearance of Darkhawk? 0

[Get Marwood & I]

15 minutes ago, divad said:

[Who gives a rip about Darkhawk?] 

No pence variants, no Australian variants... Let's face it, the guys a let down. 

[shadroch]

On 6/15/2019 at 2:07 PM, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

The market decides what it wants to own. What people want to own doesn't affect whether a preview is a first appearance.

It certainly affects what a preview can cost, and isn't that what this hobby is truly about these days. It doesn't matter what people call it, it's what people are willing to pay.

[zhamlau]

48 minutes ago, divad said:

[Who gives a rip about Darkhawk?] 

Probably everyone replying to this topic...hence them replying 

[rlextherobot]

17 hours ago, boomtown said:

It's just my opinion, but I believe that the market that is buying up these "preview" books are a different market than the ones made up of collectors/readers. The Modern Spec market has been able to create a pocket market off of these type books with collectors/investors that do not read the books. There is a bit of dishonesty when these type books are marketed as 1st appearances, when most readers understand that these are advertisements or promo material sent out by the publisher to promote the true titles.

I've listened to people characterize DC Comics Presents 26 with the promo story of the New Teen Titans as the same thing as the promotional advertising done in the Marvel Age title. One being a first story specifically created for that book and the other being promotional pages of the upcoming new title. It's either dishonesty by someone pumping a spec book they are holding or ignorance of the difference between a 1st appearance, and promotional material put out.

I tend to agree with this position. I am flabbergasted seeing prices go way up on the free 50th Anniversary DC Preview book because it's supposedly the first appearance of Watchmen (a "fact" which has made it's way onto Wikipedia), in a one page preview image. 

I certainly believe these books can be collectible for fans of a character or series, but to suggest that non-story preview images count as captial F, capital A First Appearances feels dishonest to me. Mileage will vary.   

[zhamlau]

44 minutes ago, shadroch said:

It certainly affects what a preview can cost, and isn't that what this hobby is truly about these days. It doesn't matter what people call it, it's what people are willing to pay.

I think once these books started costing as much as paychecks and top off around Malibu beach houses, yeah cost became the most important.

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

1 hour ago, zhamlau said:

Probably everyone replying to this topic...hence them replying 

I don't care about Darkhawk. I do care about people trying to redefine long-accepted terminology for the hobby.

Preview books can be collectible and valuable, as the market as shown. But they're not first appearances.

[divad]

2 hours ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

I don't care about Darkhawk. I do care about people trying to redefine long-accepted terminology for the hobby.

Preview books can be collectible and valuable, as the market as shown. But they're not first appearances.

[revat]

5 hours ago, Get Marwood & I said:

6 hours ago, divad said:

[Who gives a rip about Darkhawk?] 

No pence variants, no Australian variants... Let's face it, the guys a let down. 

I have the Mexican versions.

 

 

[Get Marwood & I]

1 minute ago, revat said:

I have the Mexican versions.

 

 

He's elevated! 

[RockMyAmadeus]

17 hours ago, zhamlau said:

Marvel Age is listed as being out the month earlier, so it clearly came first.

Of course. Previews that come out after the material previewed don't serve much purpose.

17 hours ago, zhamlau said:

What’s more it’s not just an advertisement it’s the actual first 6 pages of the story.  

It's the first 6 pages of Darkhawk #1, yes. It's not original material, not intended for anywhere else.

17 hours ago, zhamlau said:

I can get the argument about motion picture funnies not having wide distribution (not sure if we really know how it was distributed)

We know exactly how it was distributed: not at all. A single sample copy was the only one known for decades. Then, 7 or 8 more copies were discovered in the estaate of the publisher, Lloyd Jacquet, in 1974. It not only didn't have "wide distribution", it had no distribution whatsoever, as it simply wasn't produced beyond a handful of samples.

18 hours ago, zhamlau said:

Where this argument losses steam I think is San Diego comic con issue 2, which cgc treats as the first appearance of Hellboy even though it wasn’t nationally distributed , and for many years cgc treated John Byrne Nextmen 21 as the first appearance.

This is not relevant. What CGC calls something doesn't make it that, and a book doesn't need to be "nationally distributed" to have been published and distributed.

18 hours ago, zhamlau said:

With all this being said I think the general rule is collectors treat MA97 like the premier book to have for DH because it came out first, but following the rules written down in OS years back you accept DH1 as first appearance.

I think this on some level is like “rookie cards” in baseball. You can appear in a licensed set and have it be your first card, and up until about 10 years ago it would be considered your “RC” designated rookie card...But now based on the new rules the card guides have written, true rookie cards can’t come until you played in a major league game and only count for base cards made that year you first appear.

Comic books have nothing to do with real-life players and what is considered their "rookie" card. 

It has nothing to do with "rules" stated by anybody; it is an observation of the organic development (and basic common sense) of collecting and how decades of collectors...not just one or two "rule makers"...viewed and treated these things.

Anyone can call whatever they want the "premier book to have"...matters of taste, by definition, are not subject to absolutes. There is no right or wrong answer when it comes to what someone likes.

But that doesn't change the fact that the first appearance of Darkhawk is in Darkhawk #1, not in the PREVIEW of pages from Darkhawk #1 that is contained in Marvel Age #97. 

Had Marvel Age #97 had original pages, exclusive to Marvel Age #97, then it would be a different story. But it does not.

[RockMyAmadeus]

55 minutes ago, revat said:

I have the Mexican versions.

 

 

¡Ay Carumba!

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

3 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

¡Ay Carumba!

Oscurohalcon!

[zhamlau]

1. Publishers intent matters most of all, so even if they print 20 of 21 pages of a characters first appearance say in 1992 but then add that last page and call it issue 1 in 2018, the first appearance wouldn’t count in 2018 cause the publisher used the words “preview”. In theory they could do a “first appearance” in a prestige format book with 126 pages of art with 6 distinct title splashes/stories, and still publish the art for story one in another comicbook but by slapping “preview” somewhere the book wouldn’t be considered a first appearance.

2. Publishers intent doesn’t matter at all if they print a first appearance in an earlier comic book but the book isn’t distributed successfully, even if that book is referenced later in successfully distributed comic books (like how amazing man comics start on issue 5 because it was considered a continuation of motion picture funnies 1-4 even though those books were never successfully distributed).

3. A show give away with no distribution can be considered a first appearance even if the word preview is slapped on it somewhere because publishers intent matters somewhat but not fully. Even if the book is really just a free preview/promo of books the publisher plans on selling later, sites like GCD and cgc can consider it a first appearance.

 

It seems understanding when and when not to consider publishers intent is the key. Think I follow.

 

Edited June 18, 2019 by zhamlau

[shadroch]

Follow the money.

[Aweandlorder]

17 hours ago, revat said:

I have the Mexican versions.

 

 

Wonder if Mexicans are debating the same topic.. oh wait!... there is no MA97 in Spanish 

[Aweandlorder]

17 hours ago, revat said:

I have the Mexican versions.

 

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

5 hours ago, zhamlau said:

1. Publishers intent matters most of all, so even if they print 20 of 21 pages of a characters first appearance say in 1992 but then add that last page and call it issue 1 in 2018, the first appearance wouldn’t count in 2018 cause the publisher used the words “preview”. In theory they could do a “first appearance” in a prestige format book with 126 pages of art with 6 distinct title splashes/stories, and still publish the art for story one in another comicbook but by slapping “preview” somewhere the book wouldn’t be considered a first appearance.

You're making this much too complicated to justify your position. What you describe has never happened in comics. In the impossibly unlikely event that it does, then the collecting community will decide what to call it. If a publisher, for some strange reason, only managed to print a preview and then failed to print the book previewed, it is almost certainly because of something very unusual happening. As well, a publisher isn't going to print 95% of an upcoming publication in preview form. That's not a preview, regardless of what the publisher calls it, and wouldn't be treated as such by the collecting community.

And Darkhawk meets none of those conditions.

6 hours ago, zhamlau said:

2. Publishers intent doesn’t matter at all if they print a first appearance in an earlier comic book but the book isn’t distributed successfully, even if that book is referenced later in successfully distributed comic books (like how amazing man comics start on issue 5 because it was considered a continuation of motion picture funnies 1-4 even though those books were never successfully distributed).

You're trying to argue exceptions as if they are the rule, and muddying up the argument. Motion Picture Funnies #1-4 were not only "not successfully distributed"...they weren't even published and, in the case of issues #2-4, don't even exist.  That Jacquet chose to keep the numbering for Amazing Man (IF he did; that question is not resolved, and may never be) is almost certainly because he wanted to be approved for second class mailing status by the Post Office (and, indeed, such an application was submitted), not because he was trying to establish any sort of historical importance to MPF. I don't imagine there's any sort of reference to MPF anywhere in Amazing Man (hence the open question), so assuming #5 is a continuation is A. speculation at best, and B. likely an artifact of mailing requirements, and nothing more, especially since the supposed "previous issues" #2-4 don't actually exist.

On the other hand, Marvel Comics #1 had a combined reported print run (Oct. and Nov.) of 825,000 copies, and was distributed through normal channels nationwide. In the case of MPF, the publisher's intent was for these books to be published and given away at movie theaters...but that never happened. It's obviously not possible for the collecting community to understand something as a "first appearance" in a comic book which was only known by a single unpublished sample for decades (or unknown entirely until the Jacquet estate copies were discovered in 1974; sources differ), which is why Marvel Comics #1...and NOT MPF #1...is the first appearance of the Sub-Mariner. IF MPF had been printed and distributed as intended, it would, properly, be the first appearance of Subby. But it never happened.

If a book is not actually published...and collectors don't even know it exists...it obviously cannot be considered a first appearance, even if samples were produced, because what matters is what fandom over time has concluded.

The circumstances between MPF and Marvel Age #97/Darkhawk are so far removed from each other, they cannot be reasonably compared in even the slightest way, and it's rather silly to try.

6 hours ago, zhamlau said:

3. A show give away with no distribution can be considered a first appearance even if the word preview is slapped on it somewhere because publishers intent matters somewhat but not fully. Even if the book is really just a free preview/promo of books the publisher plans on selling later, sites like GCD and cgc can consider it a first appearance.

Again, you're muddying up the argument to suit your position. One more time: San Diego Comicon Comics #2 was distributed; its distribution merely happened at a single location. Is the word "preview" "slapped on it somewhere"? Was SDCC supposed to be a "preview" book? Or is it a compilation book of original material? Is the Hellboy material in SDCC later printed in the titles themselves, or is it wholly original material? 

6 hours ago, zhamlau said:

It seems understanding when and when not to consider publishers intent is the key. Think I follow.

No. As was stated previously, what is key is understanding what the collecting community, en masse and over time, has concluded. Publisher intent...and the consideration thereof...is important, but it is not the key. Most of the time, publisher intent matters. Sometimes, however, it doesn't matter a single bit. Publishers don't care what the collecting community thinks, and don't tailor their publications to suit the whims of collectors. 

You want the answer? Find out what collectors over time have thought about it. That's the key.

PS. Value is meaningless in the discussion. How much something is worth doesn't alter what it is.

[RockMyAmadeus]

7 hours ago, zhamlau said:

In theory they could do a “first appearance” in a prestige format book with 126 pages of art with 6 distinct title splashes/stories, and still publish the art for story one in another comicbook but by slapping “preview” somewhere the book wouldn’t be considered a first appearance.

One more note on this specific point: 

If a complete story is printed in its entirety in an anthology, and then later just that story is printed in its own standalone book, that standalone book will be considered a reprint, because that's what it is. It has nothing to do with "slapping" anything on anything. Obviously, if something is printed in its entirety and available to the public (specifically with regard to printed matter, as opposed to entire works only available to limited audiences), by definition it's not a preview, regardless of what the publisher considers it.

But...if a selection of a work is printed (and not 20 of 21 pages) for the express purpose of previewing upcoming publications (like Marvel Age, or "advance copies", or 3-6 pages printed in the backs of other books, like Agents #6), then the collecting community is usually going to agree with the publisher's intent. In the case of Marvel Age, it's obvious what that is, since it identified itself as a preview publication AND never attempted to print entire works (which would defeat its purpose.)

On the very rare occasions where Marvel Age published entirely original content, those specific examples would (and should) be considered first appearances.

The comic collecting community isn't stupid. They can figure, and have figured, these things out. If you're looking for "rules" you're not going to find them. Each case is unique, and only general guidelines apply. If you want direction, consider how and what collectors have historically considered them to be.

 

[seanfingh]

What is fascinating about this "debate" is that it is the confluence of several factors that have never been part of the classic comic collecting milieu: (1) The desire to have your slabbed comic say "1st appearance." In the old days, the market just sorted itself out - now people want to have the comfort of those little words on the right side of their slabs; (2) The instantaneous nature of information dissemination. Again in the old days, people would do research, write or read articles in Overstreet, CVM, CGB or *gasp* Wizard and again, it would, over time, sort itself out - now it is like an immediate blood chumming shark tank for every new character announcement; and (3) Media hype price explosions. You take all of these together and first appearance becomes more than what it has always been - the first appearance of the character in the context of a published, serialized comic book story.  Now it is more of a "dive for the last of the musical chairs" type cash grab where you just keep going back to find something else that can be hoarded and cashed out when the character makes a cameo in "Devil Dinosaur 4."

Historically, a first appearance is what it is, and don't forget, there has always been that old chestnut about "cameo appearances" a la Hulk 180. There can't be a cameo unless the character is already known, and thus a first appearance cannot be a cameo. So anyone that wants a first appearance to be anything else is going to be bucking the trend of historic collecting parlance, which is fine. Just don't expect the old guard to change.  Personally, I wish those folks would find a new term and leave "first appearance" alone - call it a "Bingo!" or a "money shot" or a "dead president bonanza" or whatever.   

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

If a book is not actually published...and collectors don't even know it exists...it obviously cannot be considered a first appearance, even if samples were produced, because what matters is what fandom over time has concluded.

Revisiting this, since it can be misconstrued: I am not saying that first appearances are determined by consensus. Most certainly, the objective facts take precedence over consensus. What I'm saying is that, in cases that are unclear, or (as with Darkhawk) challenged by later generations, then historical consensus is the "deciding vote" most of the time.

For example...FF #1 is the first appearance of the Fantastic Four. Now, someone can come along and say "well, they weren't in costume, so the REAL first appearance of the FF isn't until issue #3." No doubt, that argument can be made, and has been made, and even has a tiny measure of legitimacy. But, the first appearance of the FF is issue #1, their transformation and power acquisition occurs in #1, their story begins in issue #1, and, historically, consensus has agreed.

Thankfully, there aren't hordes of #3s out there, bought up by silly speculators, who then try to retcon in their favor.