valiantman

Superman #1 was a book of reprints, including the cover, which is from a panel inside an earlier issue of Action Comics. So, this advertisement is "the first appearance of the cover of a reprint book with reprint cover art"? Nifty.

Haven't you heard? All reprints are worthless, and besides, that's not the Bone from Image. If a modern book is not from Image, then it can't be worth anything.

Hulk #324 was 33 years ago.

The hobby could shift somewhat as a result of the continued publication of books. Grey Hulk wasn't a separate character until decades later, so Hulk #1 is the first Hulk (and first Grey Hulk), but Hulk #2 is now the first (full) Green Hulk. There are characters which are "played by" other named characters later, multiple Robins for Batman, etc., so the first Robin (Detective #38) is already recognized differently from the first Jason Todd as Robin. Obviously the earlier one is more important, but as we've seen with Groot, the early not-very-close appearance can get more credit if the continued stories (or movies) add importance/collectibility to a character. Superman #123 has the first Supergirl (or Super-Girl) who isn't Kara Zor-El, but if there's more story about a series of Supergirls or Batgirls throughout publication history, it could make these first ones (even if they only existed for an issue) more important if someone collects ALL of the incarnations of a character. This is of course a different discussion than Action #251 since that's Kara Zor-El in an advertisement, but Superman #123 is definitely the first Super-Girl, just not Kara. If there's a whole series of Supergirls someday, or if the "wish" Super-Girl of Superman #123 is brought back, given a story, alternate universe, whatever, then Superman #123 could be more than it is. It's unlikely it would ever be more than Action #252 no matter how many "other" Supergirl stories could be told, but it does have plenty of room to grow.

No, because Rubie's is licensed by DC, Marvel, etc. https://www.rubies.com/licensed-themes.html?view=all

At what..? Carrying me around in a backpack.

Failed? Or yet-to-be-rumored for the next movie?

In the most general terms, Rule #31, based upon the More Fun #31 preview of Action Comics #1, would suggest that preview books should be worth almost nothing compared to the first appearance market value if we go back to the beginning of the hobby. Rule #13, based upon the preview of Spawn #1 in Malibu Sun #13, would suggest that preview books should be worth about 20% of the first appearance market value, and adjusted for the CGC census count differences if we're trying to find a good estimate using modern books. Taking these rules together, you can make the case that preview books should be worth anywhere from "basically nothing" up to around 20% of the first appearance market value, giving us a solid range of prices that's easy to calculate. Then, once that dollar range is calculated, the preview price should be adjusted according to the CGC census counts. That's it. That's all. RULE 20: Previews are worth 20% of the first appearance price, then adjusted for CGC census differences.

That... is why you fail.

Elfquest collecting info: 1st appearance - Fantasy Quarterly #1 2nd appearance - Elfquest #2 ($1.00 cover price) 3rd appearance - Elfquest #3 ($1.00 cover price) ...sometime later... Elfquest #1 ($1.00 cover price) ...any issue of Elfquest #2, #3, or #1, with more than a $1.00 cover price is a reprint.

I wish people would stop mentioning DD #115 at all. The date for DD #115 is November 1974. The date for Incredible Hulk #180 is October 1974. DD #115 happened AFTER Hulk #180. Daredevil #115 is at BEST just a "2nd appearance ad"... and that's not a thing (unless you're trying to sell one, then it's the greatest thing that has ever happened in the world).

Agreed, there won't ever be any concrete formulas that are 100% accurate for the hobby of collecting "funny books", however, there are almost 20 years of CGC sales data and more than 4,000,000 slabs on the CGC census. It's definitely time to look at what data is available now compared to the pre-internet, pre-CGC, pre-Ebay days of annual paper price guides giving us a few retailer opinions primarily driven by retailer's continuous need to provide for their families and an author's desire to put out a price guide each year with flat multipliers across all titles regardless of reality. We don't have a "rule" that CGC 9.8 modern is always twice the price of CGC 9.6 modern, but it's true often. What makes it untrue? When CGC 9.8 is significantly harder to find than CGC 9.6, then the price can be more than double for 9.8. How do we know those things? Actual sales and the CGC census. We've established lots of "norms" in this hobby, many of them from "gut feeling", but you could still run calculations on the results even if the prices were completely random (which they aren't). There are still some questions in the hobby, what's a reasonable price/premium for a preview? How does it relate to the price of the first appearance? Does the market have a standard for preview pricing? Can we put together the data for case studies? How does the CGC census impact the results? ...and here we are.

No difference. Sellers are just trying to make more money by any means necessary. Are they neat ads? Yes. Are they first appearances? Nope. Why would anyone claim they are? Money.

Are you sure?