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

[divad]

18 hours ago, Jaydogrules said:

The reason being this is an out of continuity cameo.  A quirk in release schedules of the two books. UXM 266 was the intended first appearance. 

-J.

And this statement is significant to whom? 

Edited October 2, 2018 by divad

[divad]

On 2/6/2015 at 1:35 PM, RockMyAmadeus said:

You don't even need the Marvel catalog...here's the info from the US Copyright office:

 

X-Men Annual #14 (part 4): Issues Registered:

v. 1, no. 14, 1990. Created 1990; Pub. 1990-05-29; Reg. 1990-06-19; TX0002843529

 

Here's the X-Men #266 info:

 

v. 1, no. 266, late Aug90. Created 1990; Pub. 1990-06-19; Reg. 1990-08-27; TX0002882810

 

 

[lightninglad]

12 hours ago, sfcityduck said:

No, the market considers Hulk 181 to be the more desirable and valuable book.  However, everyone knows that Hulk 180 is Wolverine's first appearance, albeit in a pretty big final panel cameo (with associated storyline referring to and providing backstory on Wolverine earlier in the book).  Which is why, for example, CGC calls 180 "first appearance of Wolverine in cameo on last page."  You may not believe this, but back in the day Hulk 180 was the more valuable book.  

I see this notion thrown about from time to time, but I've never seen any evidence to support it. All the ads I've seen going back to the early 80's show Hulk 181 priced significantly higher than 180. I'm not arguing that the statement isn't true, I'd just like to know what it's based upon.

[sfcityduck]

4 hours ago, lightninglad said:

I see this notion thrown about from time to time, but I've never seen any evidence to support it. All the ads I've seen going back to the early 80's show Hulk 181 priced significantly higher than 180. I'm not arguing that the statement isn't true, I'd just like to know what it's based upon.

Life experience from collecting X-Men starting in the mid-70s to end of 80s.  I haven't double checked my OPG's, but other folks have posted that OPG used to price 180 higher than 181.  Admittedly, the pricing on 181 fairly quickly garnered higher prices than 180 because it was viewed as the cooler issue.  This may also come as a surprise to some, but sometimes the first appearance is not prized as highly by collectors as the second.  Examples include MPFW 1 vs. MC 1 (Subby) and NYWF 1939 vs. Adventure 40 (Sandman).  But, just because collectors will pay more for a second appearance than a first, does not mean the second appearance becomes the first appearance.

Edited October 2, 2018 by sfcityduck

[sfcityduck]

12 hours ago, Jaydogrules said:

The reason being this is an out of continuity cameo.  A quirk in release schedules of the two books. UXM 266 was the intended first appearance. 

-J.

This isn't unheard of.  For example, New York World's Fair 1 (1939) is the first appearance of the Sandman, having appeared before Adventure 40.  But, the story in Adventure 40 was drawn and intended to be published first.  CGC lists NYWF 1939 as the "first published appearance of Sandman."   Whereas Adventure 40 is denoted by CGC as "first conceived story."  

The point being, the "first appearance" is the first appearance that is published, not the first story drawn.

Edited October 2, 2018 by sfcityduck

[Aweandlorder]

12 hours ago, Jaydogrules said:

The reason being this is an out of continuity cameo.  A quirk in release schedules of the two books. UXM 266 was the intended first appearance. 

-J.

Correct. With the exception that clearly it wasn't a cameo. 

The first appearance should be 266. But the first published appearance was annual 14

[sfcityduck]

30 minutes ago, Aweandlorder said:

The first appearance should be have been 266. But the first published appearance was annual 14.

Fixed.  It's not a first appearance unless it was published first.  Again, see NYWF 1939 vs. Adventure 40.  The fact that the story was drawn first, doesn't mean it was a first appearance.

[Aweandlorder]

2 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

Fixed.  It's not a first appearance unless it was published first.  Again, see NYWF 1939 vs. Adventure 40.  The fact that the story was drawn first, doesn't mean it was a first appearance.

I don't know what the rules are in that debate. Just stating the facts

[AGGIEZ]

14 hours ago, Jaydogrules said:

The reason being this is an out of continuity cameo.  A quirk in release schedules of the two books. UXM 266 was the intended first appearance. 

-J.

That’s interesting. I think the green box in the pic below confirms that. Looks like both Uncanny X-Men #266 and #267 were supposed to come out before this book.

 

 

[Lazyboy]

1 hour ago, AGGIEZ said:

Looks like both Uncanny X-Men #266 and #267 were supposed to come out before this book.

Sometimes scheduling gets messed up and stories aren't published in order. Sometimes stories are intentionally published out of order (see MSHSW). Sometimes the publishers just aren't concerned with the release dates lining up.

[the blob]

It is really an oddity because there is gambit and people reading the comic have not much of a clue as to who he is because he hasn't been introduced yet (it has been a long time since I read that one).

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 hour ago, Lazyboy said:

3 hours ago, AGGIEZ said:

Looks like both Uncanny X-Men #266 and #267 were supposed to come out before this book.

Sometimes scheduling gets messed up and stories aren't published in order. Sometimes stories are intentionally published out of order (see MSHSW). Sometimes the publishers just aren't concerned with the release dates lining up.

This. It's not that #267 was supposed to come out before Annual #14...it wasn't...but editorial would have known the storyline for #265-#267...especially since X-Men was bi-weekly at this point...when Annual #14 was published.

The fact is, Annual #14 isn't a cameo, DID come out before #266 (whether that was on purpose or accident) and DOES contain the first appearance of Gambit on multiple pages. So, #266 is valued higher. So? That doesn't change the reality that is Annual #14 being Gambit's FIRST APPEARANCE. And if people want to say #266 is Gambit's first FULL appearance, hey, great, no problem with that.

[sfcityduck]

16 hours ago, lightninglad said:

I see this notion thrown about from time to time, but I've never seen any evidence to support it. All the ads I've seen going back to the early 80's show Hulk 181 priced significantly higher than 180. I'm not arguing that the statement isn't true, I'd just like to know what it's based upon.

Checked my old OPG.  Up to No. 7, there was no separate pricing of 180, 181 or 182.  OPG Nos. 8-10 incorrectly noted 181 as the first appearance of Wolverine and marginally priced it above the surrounding issues.

OPG No. 11, however, correctly noted 180 as the first appearance of Wolverine for the first time, and significantly boosted the price of 180 to $12, as compared to $5.25 for 181 and 182 (which was also a big bump in price).

The following year, in OPG 11, 180 was still noted as the first appearance, but 181 had retaken the price lead.

[divad]

7 minutes ago, sfcityduck said:

Checked my old OPG.  Up to No. 7, there was no separate pricing of 180, 181 or 182.  OPG Nos. 8-10 incorrectly noted 181 as the first appearance of Wolverine and marginally priced it above the surrounding issues.

OPG No. 11, however, correctly noted 180 as the first appearance of Wolverine for the first time, and significantly boosted the price of 180 to $12, as compared to $5.25 for 181 and 182 (which was also a big bump in price).

The following year, in OPG 11, 180 was still noted as the first appearance, but 181 had retaken the price lead.

Once again, largely irrelevant. We are talking real dollars and cents, not "tree-fiddy"   

 

[divad]

Oh, and just to chime in on Gambit, "intent" is also irrelevant to the discussion (unless you own a short-box of UXM #266s).

[oakman29]

1 hour ago, divad said:

Oh, and just to chime in on Gambit, "intent" is also irrelevant to the discussion (unless you own a short-box of UXM #266s).

I also agree that that the Annual #14 IS Gambits actual first appearance.

[AGGIEZ]

11 hours ago, sfcityduck said:

Checked my old OPG.  Up to No. 7, there was no separate pricing of 180, 181 or 182.  OPG Nos. 8-10 incorrectly noted 181 as the first appearance of Wolverine and marginally priced it above the surrounding issues.

OPG No. 11, however, correctly noted 180 as the first appearance of Wolverine for the first time, and significantly boosted the price of 180 to $12, as compared to $5.25 for 181 and 182 (which was also a big bump in price).

The following year, in OPG 11, 180 was still noted as the first appearance, but 181 had retaken the price lead.

Take it to the Bronze board or the other countless Hulk #180 vs. #181 threads... 

We are discussing much less important books here...

Edited October 3, 2018 by AGGIEZ

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

22 hours ago, Lazyboy said:

Sometimes scheduling gets messed up and stories aren't published in order. Sometimes stories are intentionally published out of order (see MSHSW). Sometimes the publishers just aren't concerned with the release dates lining up.

IIRC, Marvel was publishing one annual per week during the summer for a few years in a row back then (first with the full-line crossovers – Evolutionary War and Atlantis Attacks – and then with family crossovers), so to wait on publishing the X-Men Annual would have screwed up the rest of the summer's annual releases. I imagine the story was written with the idea that it would be published after 266, but the schedule didn't work that way. So yeah, the Annual came first, but since no one knew who Gambit was his role was minuscule in the story, which is probably why it's referred to as a cameo, even if he is on multiple pages.

[divad]

11 hours ago, AGGIEZ said:

We are discussing much less important books here...

Edited October 4, 2018 by divad

[Crimebuster]

You guys ever read Marvel's original Star Wars series?

Towards the end of the series, there's this big new character named Bey that turns out to be a childhood friend of Han's. He's hyped up in the stories as being a super famous, important figure in the rebellion. A big new character!

The three-part storyline introducing him was supposed to run through #98-100.

However, there was some production delay. So they made the completely bizarre decision to publish #99 and #100 as planned, and then print the first part of the three-part arc in #101 as a flashback! For #98, they just printed a random fill-in inventory story. 

#101 was written first, intended to come out first, and the story comes first chronologically in continuity. So does that make #101 his first appearance, even though he already appeared in #99 and #100?