• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

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

Started by Aweandlorder,

620 posts in this topic

Bosco685

Bosco685

Posted
Posted

That's why it really comes down to the individual collector.

 

- Apocalypse: X-Factor #5 or 6?

 

- Archangel: X-Factor #23 or 24?

 

- Cable: New Mutants #86 or 87?

 

Going by the rule 'any appearance is a 1st appearance', then the market has been wrong on these books too. Though with X-Men Annual #14, it has much more than a cameo in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
500Club

500Club

Posted
Posted
Going by the rule 'any appearance is a 1st appearance', then the market has been wrong on these books too. Though with X-Men Annual #14, it has much more than a cameo in it.

'First Appearance' morphed from literal meaning into figure of speech in this hobby long ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bosco685

Bosco685

Posted
Posted
Going by the rule 'any appearance is a 1st appearance', then the market has been wrong on these books too. Though with X-Men Annual #14, it has much more than a cameo in it.

'First Appearance' morphed from literal meaning into figure of speech in this hobby long ago.

 

THIS is very true. Like 'Rare' and 'Scarce'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Vikingreed

Vikingreed

Posted
Posted (edited)
That's why it really comes down to the individual collector.

 

- Apocalypse: X-Factor #5 or 6?

 

- Archangel: X-Factor #23 or 24?

 

- Cable: New Mutants #86 or 87?

 

Going by the rule 'any appearance is a 1st appearance', then the market has been wrong on these books too. Though with X-Men Annual #14, it has much more than a cameo in it.

 

That's the big difference to me.

The annual appearance is in no way a cameo. To me, anyway.

Edited by vikingreed
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeeksAreMyPeeps

GeeksAreMyPeeps

Posted
Posted
That's why it really comes down to the individual collector.

 

- Apocalypse: X-Factor #5 or 6?

 

- Archangel: X-Factor #23 or 24?

 

- Cable: New Mutants #86 or 87?

 

Going by the rule 'any appearance is a 1st appearance', then the market has been wrong on these books too. Though with X-Men Annual #14, it has much more than a cameo in it.

I don't think the Gambit appearances is really comparable to the other examples, or the IH example. In this particular case, it looks as if the story in UXM was written with the idea in mind that this would be the reader's introduction to Gambit, and the publishing schedule necessitated having to fit in an explanation of who this Gambit character that no one knew about was. That's the way it reads to me. But being a company with a lot of moving parts, Marvel had the annual on the schedule where it fit based on the publishing plan, earlier than it would have comfortably fit creatively. This does not change the reality of what was published first, but I think it does have an effect on what a collector might desire more, more so than the other examples cited.

 

For the record, I have one copy of UXM 266 that's likely not leaving my collection any time soon, and several copies of the annual which I may look to move soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bosco685

Bosco685

Posted
Posted
That's why it really comes down to the individual collector.

 

- Apocalypse: X-Factor #5 or 6?

 

- Archangel: X-Factor #23 or 24?

 

- Cable: New Mutants #86 or 87?

 

Going by the rule 'any appearance is a 1st appearance', then the market has been wrong on these books too. Though with X-Men Annual #14, it has much more than a cameo in it.

I don't think the Gambit appearances is really comparable to the other examples, or the IH example. In this particular case, it looks as if the story in UXM was written with the idea in mind that this would be the reader's introduction to Gambit, and the publishing schedule necessitated having to fit in an explanation of who this Gambit character that no one knew about was. That's the way it reads to me. But being a company with a lot of moving parts, Marvel had the annual on the schedule where it fit based on the publishing plan, earlier than it would have comfortably fit creatively. This does not change the reality of what was published first, but I think it does have an effect on what a collector might desire more, more so than the other examples cited.

 

For the record, I have one copy of UXM 266 that's likely not leaving my collection any time soon, and several copies of the annual which I may look to move soon.

 

It's all good. And for those that like collecting either Gambit or Uncanny X-Men, they will have both books anyway. So either way, they are covered.

 

I think what someone said much earlier in the thread is where the real friction comes into play. The money bump. And that's okay too if that is why someone is so fixated on 'spreading the word'. I'm just a reader/collector.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
oakman29

oakman29

Posted
Posted
So, Gambit... Annual #14... #266... has there been some change I should know about? Or is Annual 14 still his first appearance & 266 his first cover?

 

:D

 

 

 

-slym

 

So..... Is this thing finally settled? Now CGC has to change all our slabs. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
3 3
Go to topic listing