X-Men Annual #14 - Proof of Gambit's 1st published appearance within 3 3

[Broke as a Joke]

I have to say that the label notes should absolutely matter, but CGC tends to get things wrong which can construe things. CGC still forgets to label second or later printings sometimes which can be worrisome to buyers.

 

If you are going to label the Annual 14 as the first appearance of Gambit, then what do you label 266 as? First formal introduction to Gambit? I think the big money stays with 266 in this case. And people have known about Annual 14 being out first for years now and it hasn't made a dent in the popularity of 266.

[RockMyAmadeus]

I have to say that the label notes should absolutely matter, but CGC tends to get things wrong which can construe things. CGC still forgets to label second or later printings sometimes which can be worrisome to buyers.

 

The answer is not thinking that the label notes should matter, because they obviously cannot. They are subject to change, obviously, as the market changes. What if a book is the first appearance of two characters? What if one of those characters is popular, but the other no one cares about? And then, down the line, what if that other character becomes popular? All those slabs will have notes that are wrong, according to the view of the market.

 

The sure answer, therefore, is to put NO stock in the label notes, to recognize that they aren't ever going to be entirely correct and/or complete for every book, and recognize that they aren't to be considered authoritative.

 

Problem solved.

 

[Aweandlorder]

I have to say that the label notes should absolutely matter, but CGC tends to get things wrong which can construe things. CGC still forgets to label second or later printings sometimes which can be worrisome to buyers.

 

The answer is not thinking that the label notes should matter, because they obviously cannot. They are subject to change, obviously, as the market changes. What if a book is the first appearance of two characters? What if one of those characters is popular, but the other no one cares about? And then, down the line, what if that other character becomes popular? All those slabs will have notes that are wrong, according to the view of the market.

 

The sure answer, therefore, is to put NO stock in the label notes, to recognize that they aren't ever going to be entirely correct and/or complete for every book, and recognize that they aren't to be considered authoritative.

 

Problem solved.

 

[Illustrious]

People have known about Annual 14 being out first for years now and it hasn't made a dent in the popularity of 266.

 

Many people, including myself, didn't realize how much evidence stacked up in X-Men Annual #14's favor as being the actual full first appearance of Gambit until recently. Seeing the release date schedule, copyright info, and actual scans of the Gambit panels in XMA #14 show to me that a large majority in the hobby has had it wrong all these years, and are too stubborn to admit their mistake now.

[Waylander]

People have known about Annual 14 being out first for years now and it hasn't made a dent in the popularity of 266.

 

Many people, including myself, didn't realize how much evidence stacked up in X-Men Annual #14's favor as being the actual full first appearance of Gambit until recently. Seeing the release date schedule, copyright info, and actual scans of the Gambit panels in XMA #14 show to me that a large majority in the hobby has had it wrong all these years, and are too stubborn to admit their mistake now.

 

 

 

Correcting mistakes cost money

[RockMyAmadeus]

People have known about Annual 14 being out first for years now and it hasn't made a dent in the popularity of 266.

 

Many people, including myself, didn't realize how much evidence stacked up in X-Men Annual #14's favor as being the actual full first appearance of Gambit until recently. Seeing the release date schedule, copyright info, and actual scans of the Gambit panels in XMA #14 show to me that a large majority in the hobby has had it wrong all these years, and are too stubborn to admit their mistake now.

 

This. This, times a bazillion, especially the last part.

[darkstar]

Easier to stick with where the money is while also picking up copies of the annual on the cheap

[divad]

What if a book is the first appearance of two characters? What if one of those characters is popular, but the other no one cares about? And then, down the line, what if that other character becomes popular? All those slabs will have notes that are wrong, according to the view of the market.

 

For instance Batman Adventures 12 . . .

[divad]

People have known about Annual 14 being out first for years now and it hasn't made a dent in the popularity of 266.

 

Many people, including myself, didn't realize how much evidence stacked up in X-Men Annual #14's favor as being the actual full first appearance of Gambit until recently. Seeing the release date schedule, copyright info, and actual scans of the Gambit panels in XMA #14 show to me that a large majority in the hobby has had it wrong all these years, and are too stubborn to admit their mistake now.

 

This. This, times a bazillion, especially the last part.

 

Like you said, Ted.

[catch21]

This thread assumes the rule is 1st published makes it a first appearance. 1st appearance should be first drawn. X-men #266 was done(not published) before X-men annual #14.This explains why there is a referral to 266 in this issue. Plus, the title of #266 is “Enter the Mutant Called Gambit!”

 

If you think 1st published should count, previews would matter.

 

I do agree labels shouldn't matter except in grades.

Edited February 11, 2015 by catch21

[Crimebuster]

This thread assumes the rule is 1st published makes it a first appearance.

 

Because that's the only rule that makes any sense.

[RockMyAmadeus]

This thread assumes the rule is 1st published makes it a first appearance. 1st appearance should be first drawn. X-men #266 was done before X-men annual #14.This explains why there is a referral to 266 in this issue. Plus, the title of 266 is Enter the Mutant Called Gambit!

 

That's unworkable, and relies on assumptions that cannot be made; not to mention, contradicts traditional and long established conventions within the hobby.

 

I do agree labels shouldn't matter except in grades.

 

I disagree. The information about the book, title, issue, publication date, creator credits, all of which appear on the label, are all immutable, and not subject to the whims of the market, or someone's opinion. Those should all be correct, all the time, as there's no reason for them not to be other than human error.

 

The issue is the label notes section, which is the small section of notes to the right of the bar code. These ARE changeable, and subject to market and personal opinion, and thus should be considered immaterial to any buying/selling decisions.

 

But I understand where you're coming from...

[catch21]

This thread assumes the rule is 1st published makes it a first appearance.

 

Because that's the only rule that makes any sense.

 

So you are saying previews count?

 

If you are the sole artist/writer and created a new character finished the work on your own book, however your book was delayed. At the same time, a book that was suppose to feature your created character drawn by a different artist was on time. Do you feel the book drawn by a different artist should take credit for your created character?

[mrwoogieman]

The practical effect of educating buyers on the Annual appearance is that the Annual will see a price increase, but I believe it will still be below the value of 266 which people will continue to view as the appearance that "counts". Kind of like Hulk 180/181. The Annual will never overtake 266 in value.

 

[catch21]

This thread assumes the rule is 1st published makes it a first appearance. 1st appearance should be first drawn. X-men #266 was done before X-men annual #14.This explains why there is a referral to 266 in this issue. Plus, the title of 266 is Enter the Mutant Called Gambit!

 

That's unworkable, and relies on assumptions that cannot be made; not to mention, contradicts traditional and long established conventions within the hobby.

 

In order to visualize the character, then X-editor Bob Harras recruited a young Jim Lee to sketch out Claremont’s conception, but when it came time to introduce the character properly in “Uncanny,” British veteran comics artist Mike Collins was the man chosen to ultimately pencil Gambit’s arrival in “Uncanny” #266.

 

Mike Collins :

Unfortunately, this issue coincided with Chris’ honeymoon, so I was getting pages sent through close to deadline. I drew the book in about eight days. So, yup — tight!”

 

 

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=21007

 

Edited February 11, 2015 by catch21

[RockMyAmadeus]

This thread assumes the rule is 1st published makes it a first appearance. 1st appearance should be first drawn. X-men #266 was done before X-men annual #14.This explains why there is a referral to 266 in this issue. Plus, the title of 266 is Enter the Mutant Called Gambit!

 

That's unworkable, and relies on assumptions that cannot be made; not to mention, contradicts traditional and long established conventions within the hobby.

 

In order to visualize the character, then X-editor Bob Harras recruited a young Jim Lee to sketch out Claremonts conception, but when it came time to introduce the character properly in Uncanny, British veteran comics artist Mike Collins was the man chosen to ultimately pencil Gambits arrival in Uncanny #266.

 

Mike Collins :

Unfortunately, this issue coincided with Chris honeymoon, so I was getting pages sent through close to deadline. I drew the book in about eight days. So, yup tight!

 

 

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=21007

 

Not sure what this is in response to, or what it demonstrates.

[catch21]

This thread assumes the rule is 1st published makes it a first appearance. 1st appearance should be first drawn. X-men #266 was done before X-men annual #14.This explains why there is a referral to 266 in this issue. Plus, the title of 266 is Enter the Mutant Called Gambit!

 

That's unworkable, and relies on assumptions that cannot be made; not to mention, contradicts traditional and long established conventions within the hobby.

 

In order to visualize the character, then X-editor Bob Harras recruited a young Jim Lee to sketch out Claremonts conception, but when it came time to introduce the character properly in Uncanny, British veteran comics artist Mike Collins was the man chosen to ultimately pencil Gambits arrival in Uncanny #266.

 

Mike Collins :

Unfortunately, this issue coincided with Chris honeymoon, so I was getting pages sent through close to deadline. I drew the book in about eight days. So, yup tight!

 

 

http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=21007

 

Not sure what this is in response to, or what it demonstrates.

 

Two different sources bleeding cool and comicbooksource saying the publishing schedule got messed up and 266 was meant to be the first published of Gambit and first drawn.

Edited February 11, 2015 by catch21

[Crimebuster]

This thread assumes the rule is 1st published makes it a first appearance.

 

Because that's the only rule that makes any sense.

 

So you are saying previews count?

 

If you are the sole artist/writer and created a new character finished the work on your own book, however your book was delayed. At the same time, a book that was suppose to feature your created character drawn by a different artist was on time. Do you feel the book drawn by a different artist should take credit for your created character?

 

The other artist should not - and certainly would not - get credit for creating the character. But it would still be the first appearance of the character, because it would be the first time the character appeared. Unless you have a time machine, you can't alter reality to claim otherwise.

 

And no, I am not saying previews count, because this is a storytelling medium, not an advertising medium. If people want to collect advertisements instead of comic books, that's their prerogative, but I'm not sure why it would impact anything comic collectors are doing.

 

Anyway, this discussion is moot. Even if you want to claim that whatever was drawn first is the real first appearance - which I think is an utterly bizarre idea - that would almost certainly still be X-Men Annual #14. Given that Art Adams did the interior, he was probably drawing pages with Gambit months before #266 was done.

[catch21]

This thread assumes the rule is 1st published makes it a first appearance.

 

Because that's the only rule that makes any sense.

 

So you are saying previews count?

 

If you are the sole artist/writer and created a new character finished the work on your own book, however your book was delayed. At the same time, a book that was suppose to feature your created character drawn by a different artist was on time. Do you feel the book drawn by a different artist should take credit for your created character?

 

The other artist should not - and certainly would not - get credit for creating the character. But it would still be the first appearance of the character, because it would be the first time the character appeared. Unless you have a time machine, you can't alter reality to claim otherwise.

 

And no, I am not saying previews count, because this is a storytelling medium, not an advertising medium. If people want to collect advertisements instead of comic books, that's their prerogative, but I'm not sure why it would impact anything comic collectors are doing.

 

Anyway, this discussion is moot. Even if you want to claim that whatever was drawn first is the real first appearance - which I think is an utterly bizarre idea -

 

SEE Noble Causes Secrets 3b Variant AND Invincible #1

 

that would almost certainly still be X-Men Annual #14. Given that Art Adams did the interior, he was probably drawing pages with Gambit months before #266 was done.

 

 

source?

 

 

Edited February 11, 2015 by catch21

[darkstar]

This thread assumes the rule is 1st published makes it a first appearance. 1st appearance should be first drawn. X-men #266 was done(not published) before X-men annual #14.This explains why there is a referral to 266 in this issue. Plus, the title of #266 is “Enter the Mutant Called Gambit!”

 

If you think 1st published should count, previews would matter.

 

I do agree labels shouldn't matter except in grades.