Black Captain

I understand your concerns. When you read some of the earlier responses in this thread you will notice that many of the suggestions were to sell your restored or low grade books at this time. This advice falls under the category of cautious conventional wisdom and if you notice there are some great books in the current auctions I mentioned. But, in my opinion the abundance is not there. If your books are the type of books that bidders would normally fight over, then you will probably lose a little on some books but do better than expected on others. Overall bidders have proven in the last Heritage, Comicconnect, and Comiclink auctions that have cash and are willing to still fight for good books. If your books are great books then they will stand out and do well for THIS TIME PERIOD. Although I agree in the future this will change as cosigners see these current positive results, decide that the water is warm enough to swim in, then jump in with both feet causing the previously predicted gluttony of books creating massive competition, dragging many prices down.

Reviewing the results from the most recent Heritage, Comicconnect, and Comiclink auctions, I think it is fair to say that the current crisis is not having a big enough impact to force auction purchases downward. In fact, I would hypothesize that a lot of the strong prices achieved were due to people lacking the ability to travel or engage in a lot of the regular activities that are the norm at this time. Unemployment appears to have had very little to no impact on the market. In addition, it is also possible that a lot of individuals are reluctant to put their significant books in no reserve auctions due to fears that their books could take significant losses. However this opens a huge opportunity for individuals to do the opposite and bring their better to best books to auction allowing them to take advantage of the lack of competition. I would recommend that anyone considering cosigning should do so now while the competition is minimal and a significant amount of the population is sitting on excess cash.

I think I have part of the answer to my query. The bids certainly picked up in the end for several books in relation to where the proxy bid stood before the live bidding. Perhaps the winning bidders were motivated to adopt a wait and see strategy due to the pandemic. Why bid the desired books up prematurely when they could possibly get a bargain due to others financial instabilities. The results were not severely low on books, (Which would have been clear evidence of the pandemic affect) rather as lou_fine pointed out the results were close but slightly off the mark. I think batman _fan was also right pointing out that books went cheaper with a few outliers. So now we have to wait for the comicconnect and comiclink auctions to complete at the end of August to get the final piece of the puzzle in regards to the health of the comic book auction market. The question is, Were bidders holding back because they saw upcoming books coming to auction that they wanted just a little bit more than the books in the Heritage auction or were the prices somewhat off due to the pandemic? We will see, perhaps now is the right time to cosign higher value books.

I think the virus may be having an impact (Either on bidding strategy, finances or both) but we won't have definitive evidence of all three of my queries on the status of comic book auction market until after the upcoming auctions at comiclink and comicconnect are completed in August. But, looking at the results of this current Heritage auction will give us some preliminary data to chew on at least.

My financial environment having an impact query references the folks interested in participating in the auction but are hindered by possibly unemployment and not impacted by the highs of the market.

I guess we will see if everyone is waiting till the end, waiting till the next auction, or if the financial environment is having an impact.

Crowzilla, is this accurate or just a little joke? If accurate, can you provide the source?

Which brings us back to Content is King. And I have to also agree, the powers that be and the market will ultimately make the decisions of first appearance and value. Knowing the history of the guide I truly doubt that a change of the magnitude that we are discussing will change anything once this thread is reviewed by the authorities and normies alike in the future. Just to many questions have been put fourth.

Jaydogrules, All valid points which Crowzilla and Gator were kind enough to help clarify. The purpose of the request for a store date on Superman #4 was to make an attempt to narrow down the actual handling date for store stands to make a comparison with Action #23. With all these questionable data points, that hands on date would have helped determine with more certainty where copies of Superman #4 were during the days in which Action #23 was on the stands. At least we have one date for that book. Without the date comparison I am forced to go with the current Action #23 narrative as well. I DEFINITELY think some people would be more inclined to change their minds if evidence of that nature was a little more available for analysis.

Crowzilla, to answer your question, the Daily Planet is mentioned twice in Action #23. Here are the two pages.

Good, now hopefully someone can provide a Superman #4 date. This is how these types of questions have been answered in the past.

Sorry Joshua33, these assertions were already disregarded by DC's lack of control over distribution to hit the stands for sale. We are all beyond your response. We are now waiting for traditional/ time honored store placed date stamp evidence. Please provide.

Well no Joshua33, the measure you established throughout the thread were the actual dates that Superman #4 and Action #23 hit the stands to be purchased. NOT the earliest possible date a book could be sold based on publication. That is a different measure from the measure you have utilized throughout this thread. Without actual proof such as date stamps on Superman #4 and Action Comics #23 to concretely establish even the handling dates of the stores that handled the books for sale only a guess can be made either way. And considering that copyright dates, publication dates, stamp dates, monthly vs quarterly distribution dates, HELL even local availability for store selling are all in question then No, Superman #4 was not unquestionably available before Action Comics #23. To be that definite after all these considerations makes no logical sense. At best sale availability is questionable as Gator stated and the content of Action #23 points to a Luther 1st appearance. That is all we know as actual facts. Which means that there is no reason to make any actual changes UNLESS date stamps on Superman #4 and Action Comics #23 can be found. I don't know how long you have been in the hobby but, this is a time honored method that the community has utilized and honored throughout our history to settle such matters. Find that evidence and you will have unquestionable evidence.

I think this comment raps up all the loose questions

But Lazyboy, as per G.A. tor's response even publication dates are not 100%. So regardless of what DC's schedule was at the time, the date(s) that the Superman #4 and Action Comics #23 would have been on the stands available for sale would have been beyond the control of DC's schedule. Because DC did not completely control the exact day or dates in which their books could be picked up by customers. So in regards to this discussion copyright dates are not good enough in regards to the exact day or period that books hit the stands. Especially considering a comparison between a quarterly book vs a monthly book. It is very likely if not probable that Superman #4 and Action Comics #23 hit the stands at the same time. DC would have known about book availability at this point in history. Considering all this new information, panel #22 in Superman #4 acknowledging Action Comic #23 in the past sense would have made more sense from a readers perspective because Action #23 would have been readily available at the same time.

Lazyboy, I have to push back on that statement. The absolute main point that Joshua33 has been making is when Superman #4 hit the stands for readers to actually pick up and read. Joshua33 said that the readers at the time would not have had access to Action Comics #23. However with this new piece of information regarding actual distribution/actual hitting the stands, the official dates are now in question. Which now makes me wonder. If DC knew of these discrepancies also, would they not also know the possibility that both books would probably be available at the same time based on their past experiences alone? Making the copyright data totally irrelevant as it relates to when the books actually hit the stands.

That is a very good NEW point in this thread. So there is a possibility that both Superman #4 and Action Comics #23 could have hit the stands at the same time. Let's also keep in mind at the end of the day, the relevance of time probably was not as important as getting say, the daily news paper out in a timely manner. Although, relevant to us, probably almost completely irrelevant to the DC publishers at the time. I think this is the missing piece in this thread.

Content will always be king

Your stance is understandable and even logical right up to the point where the reader has both books right next to each other and can compare the contents. Immediate confusion would come into play. Panel #22 in Superman #4 referencing/acknowledging Action #23 in the past tense would force any reader to confusion. I believe your stance is a first in comics in this context. If a reader was asked after reading both books at the same time to determine which was written first, the reader would be forced to say that Action #23 came first from the contents alone. And at the end of the day what is more important to the majority of readers a Superman #4 that acknowledges that Action #23 existed before it or the actual date that Superman #4 was published. I am willing to bet that most/the majority consider content king and a possible publishing error does not dictate the coveted mantle of first appearance.

Joshua33, You have asked the question several times what is more important that Superman is meeting Lex, for the first time or that the reader is meeting Lex first time? I think you are leaving out a VERY important fact in your consideration. In your quote you state that, "Just to be clear Superman 4 shows Superman seeing Luthor from a distance and states "Luthor! The mad scientist who wants to take over the world". You are referencing panel #23 in Superman #4 and totaling ignoring panel #22. Where Luthor clearly states,"So! We Encounter each other once more!". Joshua33, What you don't realize is that Superman #4 is directing the reader to Action Comics #23. In the 60's Stan Lee would have placed a small box in the panel for the reader to see Action Comics #23. In ALL the history of comic book discussions/debates no one has ever argued that a character's reference to meeting another character in print should ever take the principle first appearance mantle. If panel #22 did not exist there would really be a debate here but, when panel #22 directs the reader to a previous/prior issue then basic law of time becomes primary. Although, Superman #4 was published first it references Action #23 in the past. Superman #4 acknowledges that Action #23 came first.

The page above is from Action #23. The sixth panel is superman meeting Luther for the first time a stark difference from the Superman #4 page that I listed. I think that makes #23 the first time Luther was written pen to paper even if the publication is off.

The page above is from Superman #4. The first panel quote is from Luther indicating that they have encountered one another in the past. Action #23 has no such indication. I think that makes #23 the first time Luther was written pen to paper even if the publication is off.

It has been a while but I figured I would add Detective Comics #135 May of 1948 (Published in Canada on the cover). CGC notes Canadian Edition. Priced at .10 cents on the cover. I made an error. CGC also states as publisher "National Comics Published" instead of DC comics, like the regular version.