Moderns that are heating up on ebay! 70 70

[PhilipB2k17]

1 hour ago, Lazyboy said:

Nice exaggeration. There are a lot of insufficiently_thoughtful_persons on there, but it's just barely a majority that put "1st Wolverine" (or some variation of that inaccuracy) in the listing title.

OK fine. MORE THAN HALF the people advertising this book on eBay say some variation of "1st Wolverine" or "1st Appearance Wolverine," knowing it is not. Some of them correct this misinformation in their item description. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

26 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

Yeah, no. The entire hobby knows that Hulk 180 is the true first appearance of Wolverine. You can make arguments for why Hulk 181 is more valuable ( Great first story; great cover, iconic confrontation with the Hulk; first "Full" appearance; historical preference, etc.). But what it absolutely is not, is the first appearance of Wolverine in a published comic book. 

No one is disputing this. You're arguing with the choir.

[the blob]

2 hours ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

We all agree that Hulk 181 is ~not~ the 1st Appearance of Wolverine, correct? Hulk 180 is. 

Take a look at eBay right now. 

https://m.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_trksid=p2332490.m4084.l1313.TR12.TRC2.A0.H0.Xhulk+181.TRS0&_nkw=hulk+181

Virtually everyone selling that book says it’s the “1st” appearance of Wolverine. 

 

Why wouldn't thy? They are trying to maximize what they get for their 180s. Everyone selling 181s says its the first app too.

 

[500Club]

1 hour ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

1 hour ago, 500Club said:

And even those that do, it’s in the context of the hobby having bastardized the term.  As I have posted before, ‘first appearance’ has come to mean ‘most important or meaningfully collected’ of the character’s introduction sequence.

Think of it as a colloquialization...  if I refer to someone as ‘bro’, I don’t literally mean to indicate they’re my brother.

Yeah, no. The entire hobby knows that Hulk 180 is the true first appearance of Wolverine. You can make arguments for why Hulk 181 is more valuable ( Great first story; great cover, iconic confrontation with the Hulk; first "Full" appearance; historical preference, etc.). But what it absolutely is not, is the first appearance of Wolverine in a published comic book. 

You missed the whole point of the commentary - that the expression ‘first appearance’ has been bastardized. 

You’re right - two plus two is four, the sun rises in the east, and IH 180 is the first appearance of Wolverine - period, full stop, end of story.  However, in the English language, there are numerous words and phrases that have been co-opted away from their initial or literal meaning. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

This is my new favorite video.

This should be my go-to video from now on.

[Jackhartmann]

the Noto variant of Mr. and Mrs. X #3 seems to be hot this week. I couldn't find one at the LCS.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Mr-and-Mrs-X-3-Phil-Noto-1-25-Variant-Gambit-Rogue/283170002025?hash=item41ee3f5469:g:xRoAAOSwy6Rbovdi&autorefresh=true

[divad]

15 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

So, if the book *I* sold him was trimmed and NOT disclosed as such...why did he leave such glowing feedback...? He was obviously capable of detecting trimming.

Not only was the book badly trimmed, but I plainly disclosed AND pictured it with a front-on scan...so there was no hiding it.

Unfortunately, as it is now 15 years in the past, and I certainly didn't keep the listing, it's now a "he said/she said" type situation. Why do I remember it so vividly? Because I was thoroughly annoyed when I discovered the exact book (Batman #169), listed by the exact same person who I sold it to, listed a couple of weeks later, with a picture angled so you couldn't tell the right edge was poorly trimmed, not a word mentioning the trimming, and it sold for 5 times what I had sold it for ($15 to "Divad", $75 to the unsuspecting mark.) 

So, I can only point out the information that I DO have, and leave others to come to their own conclusions, and decide who is more trustworthy and telling the truth.

Remember the Excalibur #1, graded "NM 9.4", pictured above.

I recommend, "Divad", that you drop it, and pretend I don't exist. 

You are completely delusional, and your obsession with me and an alleged sale and resale of a book you admittedly trimmed and sold (IN 2003!!!) is clearly certifiably insane.  The more you post, the less credible you become.

[fastballspecial]

This thread is going to get locked. You guys are insufficiently_thoughtful_persons on here lately. Just because a troll shows up and start an argument doesn't mean any of you have to engage them.

 

Edited September 20, 2018 by fastballspecial

[divad]

Google is an amazing tool.

[Broke as a Joke]

Back to scheduled programming... First appearance of Mr. Negative.  Spider Man FCBD 2007 is supposedly the book but CGC doesn't list it as his first appearance, just Jackpot.  Is there another book that is denoted as his first appearance or did they just pass over the FCBD?  With the success of the PS4 Spider-Man game he is gaining fans.  I could see him as the one villain Slott created that might stick.

Edited September 21, 2018 by Broke as a Joke

[maidenmate91]

13 minutes ago, Broke as a Joke said:

Back to scheduled programming... First appearance of Mr. Negative.  Spider Man FCBD 2007 is supposedly the book but CGC doesn't list it as his first appearance, just Jackpot.  Is there another book that is denoted as his first appearance or did they just pass over the FCBD?  With the success of the PS4 Spider-Man game he is gaining fans.  I could see him as the one villain Slott created that might stick.

I have been pondering the same.

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 hour ago, Broke as a Joke said:

Please don't quote "Stu's" posts. Not only is it doxing, but he's just making excrement up at this point. What is an "illegal" eBay account...? No one but this sociopath even knows. 

[RockMyAmadeus]

5 hours ago, divad said:

You are completely delusional, and your obsession with me and an alleged sale and resale of a book you admittedly trimmed and sold (IN 2003!!!) is clearly certifiably insane.  The more you post, the less credible you become.

We have once more entered Bizarro land, where down is up, black is white, and truth is fiction. Let's once again fight fiction with clear, sober fact:

1. "Divad" brought up the issue of "selling restored books without disclosure", here:

Quote

Says the guy who sells restored books without disclosure.

  That post is (currently) to be found on page 2359, the 9th post down.

That post was the catalyst for the subsequent posts on the matter. So, if "Divad" brought the issue up...and I merely responded to the charge with the facts...who is the one with the obsession...?

2. The sale was not "alleged", as "Divad" claims...I posted the feedback from the actual transaction, which clearly demonstrates that a sale from myself to him took place...again, which he brought up...with which he was completely satisfied.

3. I did not trim the book, despite the allegation of "Divad." It was trimmed...poorly...like, by a child with scissors...when I got it, and I sold it plainly stated as such. "Admittedly" means that I admitted that I did so, when, in fact, I have already stated, quite clearly, that I DID NOT trim this $15 book. That ALONE should completely disqualify "Divad's" position.

4. Being accused of selling "restored books without disclosure" is a serious, serious accusation, which should be treated seriously and not be ignored. And remember: I didn't bring it up. "Divad" did.

These are the facts, and I have supported them with evidence. I don't care what "Divad" does, so long as this person leaves me out of their posts. "Divad" has a very long history of making snarky, snide little contentious comments to people he doesn't like. He takes his little digs, and then is astonished when someone pushes back...so he gets vicious and starts up with the (multiple now) false and Bizarro-world accusations.

But none of you should have to stand with being publicly accused of fraud with no evidence, and neither should I. Regardless of whether you like or dislike a member here, no one should be subject to accusations, false or not, to which they cannot respond. 

Edited September 21, 2018 by RockMyAmadeus

[divad]

Your "evidence" is not evidence of anything from what I see and your conclusions based on the non-evidence is pathological, even Trumpian!

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

4 minutes ago, divad said:

Your "evidence" is not evidence of anything from what I see and your conclusions based on the non-evidence is pathological, even Trumpian!

 

I'm content to leave it up to the readers to determine who is, and who is not, credible at this point. My suggestion for you is to pretend like I don't exist, and I will happily, gladly do the same for you.

[divad]

10 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

I'm content to leave it up to the readers to determine who is, and who is not, credible at this point. My suggestion for you is to pretend like I don't exist, and I will happily, gladly do the same for you.

You don't exist - Poof! (but you will still reply to my every post.)

 

[followtheleader]

20 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

The funny thing is, books like "Chew" and "Saga" still command hefty back issue prices, while books like "Manifest Destiny", "Thief of Thieves", and "Skullkickers" crashed and burned.

...and, what ended up happening, at least in some cases, is that the speculators deserted, and, where there were creators who might have had more success, didn't, because speculators sucked up copies, and while yes, you had a great first issue sales number, subsequent issues dropped like a rock, and series were cancelled. Can we know for sure? No, there are always factors involved for which we cannot account, but it certainly cannot help establish a reader base when stores order 5-10 copies of a new book, and none of those copies sell to readers.

Instead of organically building a fanbase, like Walking Dead, available copies were sucked out of the market by folks hoping to make a couple of dollars...and readers didn't get a chance to try the series out. 

With FOC being only 3 weeks out now, stores should have instituted a strict one copy per person policy on everything that wasn't pre-ordered. 

I still think it's a shame about Thief of Thieves.  I enjoyed the recent issues.  I could see something coming from this in the future.  But not surprised it's a current dud with the horrible schedule. 

Manifest Destiny is the other side of the coin.   I read it, but it's clear that there wasn't a long term story beyond introducing new creatures with people dying.   

Patrick 

[RockMyAmadeus]

7 minutes ago, divad said:

19 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

I'm content to leave it up to the readers to determine who is, and who is not, credible at this point. My suggestion for you is to pretend like I don't exist, and I will happily, gladly do the same for you.

You don't exist - Poof! (but you will still reply to my every post.) 

Only if you mention me. There are literal years that have gone by where I haven't seen a word you've posted, because I didn't see any need to. Let's hope it sticks this time.

[RockMyAmadeus]

18 minutes ago, followtheleader said:

I still think it's a shame about Thief of Thieves.  I enjoyed the recent issues.  I could see something coming from this in the future.  But not surprised it's a current dud with the horrible schedule. 

Manifest Destiny is the other side of the coin.   I read it, but it's clear that there wasn't a long term story beyond introducing new creatures with people dying.   

Patrick 

Yeah, I read MD up to issue #26 or so....its premise was really fascinating, but they didn't go anywhere with it. It was just a never ending parade of "let's see what weird creatures we can encounter THIS issue"...and, from reading the comments they (the creators) wrote in their letters section, I am not surprised in the slightest. Too bad.

[PhilipB2k17]

What’s the over under on Batman Damned no.1 with Bruce Wayne’s full frontal junk exposed?