Top 50 Copper Books in Overstreet 7 7

[RockMyAmadeus]

25 minutes ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

It's not *my* alternate reason, it's the reason presented by someone who created the books. 

As I said earlier, it's not the reason presented by someone who created the books...it's your interpretation of an interview that did not ask the questions being asked here, and therefore ought not be used as answers to those questions. The questions being asked here, presented to Michelinie, might result in different answers.

27 minutes ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

And you've presented no evidence that invalidates that reason.

Sure I have. Do you not think the Cap City numbers are real? Do you think the number of books published isn't real? How does anyone...creator of the books or not...make such claims about how well the character is selling books, when that character had only appeared in five books over two years...and the numbers for those books don't support said claims...? 

It would be one thing if the numbers showed such demand...like with PWJ #6 & 7, and GR #5 & 6...but they don't. 

[GeeksAreMyPeeps]

3 minutes ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

As I said earlier, it's not the reason presented by someone who created the books...it's your interpretation of an interview that did not ask the questions being asked here, and therefore ought not be used as answers to those questions. The questions being asked here, presented to Michelinie, might result in different answers.

Sure I have. Do you not think the Cap City numbers are real? Do you think the number of books published isn't real? How does anyone...creator of the books or not...make such claims about how well the character is selling books, when that character had only appeared in five books over two years...and the numbers for those books don't support said claims...? 

It would be one thing if the numbers showed such demand...like with PWJ #6 & 7, and GR #5 & 6...but they don't. 

1. There's not a whole lot of wiggle room in interpreting what was said.

2. You have sales numbers from an alternate universe from the books he would have otherwise appeared in? I'd love to see that info. Otherwise, the sales numbers of books have no connection with the reasons why Venom did not appear in other books, if his use was being held back.

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 minute ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

1. There's not a whole lot of wiggle room in interpreting what was said.

Disagree. Asking for further clarification...which wasn't St. Pierre's focus...might have resulted in different...or clarified...answers.

34 minutes ago, GeeksAreMyPeeps said:

2. You have sales numbers from an alternate universe from the books he would have otherwise appeared in? I'd love to see that info. Otherwise, the sales numbers of books have no connection with the reasons why Venom did not appear in other books, if his use was being held back.

It does, and the reason is because of what Michelinie said: "Yes. Jim wouldn‘t let that happen, and he didn‘t force me to do new stories, even though the character became very popular, selling books. "

(emphasis added)

Michelinie's recollection, that Salicrup "held back" the character, despite selling well...his words...despite being popular...his words. I'm saying that the sales numbers don't match up with his recollection, which makes his recollection suspect.

I don't doubt that Salicrup DID want to "reserve" the character. I've never argued that that wasn't the case. I'm saying that reserving the character "in spite of his popularity" isn't an accurate assessment of what was actually happening. If sales weren't barn burners...and they weren't...it would have made it a lot easier for Salicrup to "reserve" him.

There's a middle ground in between "Venom was the hottest character on the planet, OMGWTFBBQQQQQQ!!!!" and "Venom? Venom who?"

[divad]

10 hours ago, Catwomancomics said:

So, What are the top 50 Copper books in Overstreet? 

You'll have to buy it to find out . . . 

[MyNameIsLegion]

can we argue about something else for awhile?  This was white hot when it came out: 

[Brock]

10 minutes ago, divad said:

You'll have to buy it to find out . . . 

Not true! I post it here when the Guide is released!

[RockMyAmadeus]

2 minutes ago, MYNAMEISLEGION said:

can we argue about something else for awhile?  This was white hot when it came out: 

It was. Everyone wanted a piece of it. It was the first Image book that actually became worth something fairly substantial. Sure, Spawn, but Spawn was printed out the wazoo, and not hard to find. But Shadowhawk...?

Well, Cap City orders for Spawn #1 were 204,760.

Shadowhawk was a mere 119,075.

The non-foil newsstand is much, MUCH rarer. 

[Brock]

8 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

It was. Everyone wanted a piece of it. It was the first Image book that actually became worth something fairly substantial. Sure, Spawn, but Spawn was printed out the wazoo, and not hard to find. But Shadowhawk...?

Well, Cap City orders for Spawn #1 were 204,760.

Shadowhawk was a mere 119,075.

The non-foil newsstand is much, MUCH rarer. 

I remember scouring the newsstands for copies of that book... If Shadowhawk ever helps the Avengers fight Thanos in the MCU, I'll be rich.

[F For Fake]

17 hours ago, 500Club said:

Management - probably not - but there was a mechanism whereby letter feedback played a role in decisions.   The best example I can think of was Cloak and Dagger in PPTSM 64.  They proved popular enough, and Marvel got enough feedback, that they promptly appeared again in PPTSS 69 and 70, and then again in 81 and 82.

My recall of Venom was that he was 'grassroots hot', but not overtly hot like Punisher, Wolverine and Ghost Rider.  Readers loved him.  Obviously Salicrup knew this, as he wanted to save Venom for use in ASM.   That grassroots love took some time to manifest in market heat, though.  Early on, ASM 298 was a bigger book than 300, and 312 was broken out (Hobgoblin vs GG) before 315-317.

This is absolutely my recollection. Spider-Man was hot because of McFarlane, and everyone wanted a 298. I picked up a 298 at a country grocery store, ended up trading it to a buddy for his 300, because that seemed like the more interesting book to me. I was in middle school, so that would have been around 89 or 90?

[divad]

37 minutes ago, F For Fake said:

This is absolutely my recollection. Spider-Man was hot because of McFarlane, and everyone wanted a 298. I picked up a 298 at a country grocery store, ended up trading it to a buddy for his 300, because that seemed like the more interesting book to me. I was in middle school, so that would have been around 89 or 90?

And the rest is history . . .

 

[Smeagol Eye Cherry]

12 hours ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

Again, what does "popular" mean? The only way things can be measured in terms of "popularity" is with numbers: how things sell, how the market reacts to them, and how they do on the aftermarket. 

Nice user name, by the way.

This sort of buzz tends to be reflected in the market, both with new issues sales AND back issue sales. There's nothing, however, in published literature that suggests that this was a widescale phenomenon. There's no special mention of these two in the price guides, or market reports, for years and years...and the Cap City numbers are pretty damaging to the argument.

Ghost Rider #5 and #6, however? Monster hits, and immediately "broken out" in price guides, very shortly after they were published. It was almost like printing money with books like that. Same with Punisher War Journal #6 and #7, from the same time frame as ASM #316. And the numbers support it. PWJ #5? 37,300. #6? 55,300. #7? 54,000. #8? 41,700. GR #4? 39,900. #5? 52,800. #6? 49,600. #7? 44,500. 

Those are the kind of sales bumps you should expect to see from an "insanely hot" character.  

Now, this is anecdotal, but I remember looking at ASM #316 at one point and thinking "well...it's the first real Venom cover, and it's pretty neat...but I don't see a lot of strong support in the market for it as a special issue." And, with a few exceptions (mainly 2007 and 2018), that's mostly been true. And I've always looked at comics with an eye towards "how much might this potentially be worth?"

I think you make a very good point with the Cap City numbers, and they are an important piece of the popularity puzzle, but when considering something as nebulous as popularity, they really are only one piece. They give us a clearer picture of what shop owners expected to sell, but that's not the only thing we should be considering. If that were true, then Spawn would have been the most popular comic book character in the world at one time. But of course, this has never been the case. Phil Collins sold more albums than Madonna in the 80s, but who had the greater cultural impact? Who would 9 out 10 people tell you was actually more popular?

Spider-Man is streets ahead of Batman and Wolverine in merchandise sales, for as long as I can remember there has always been a general consensus that Amazing is the most collected back issue title, Spider-Man 2002 sold more tickets than Batman 1989(my guess is most 35+ year old collectors would tell you Bats 89 was a cultural event and Spidey 02 was just a popular movie), and if we scan the box office this century - when all three had simultaneous film careers - Spider-Man comes out ahead there too. But what percentage of fans would vehemently argue that Wolverine is the most popular character of the three? Among collectors, especially using sales to comic shops as the criteria, I could hear that argument. It's wrong, but I'll allow it.

What I'm actually suggesting is that the Michelinie interview, and merchandise sales, and back issue sales, Halloween costumes and 5th grade lunch table discussions all play a role in determining popularity, and GeeksAreMyPeeps and Peter Park also make some good points in this regard. I believe you originally said "until Venom became popular in 1993" and that can only be proven to a certain degree with numbers alone. 

For instance, Marvel Diamond/sometimes-White-UPC issues should technically not be referred to as Whitman issues because, after a decent amount of investigation and discussion, we have definitive proof(unless I'm misremembering a Soapbox where Stan refers to them as Curtis issues separate from newsstand issues - someone check Snopes) that these comics were also distributed at shops and not exclusively in 3 packs. This wouldn't be the end of the world if someone got it wrong, but I would rather have a clearer picture of how things actually went down than not, so it's better to pass on accurate info. Venom's popularity before 1993 is a different question and can't be conclusively proven(nor does it need to be) any more than we can prove that Spider-Man is more popular than Batman, who is much more popular than Wolverine.

Quick tie in to the actual topic - If we aren't talking price, then I think Amazing 300 is the most important comic of the Copper Age (BA 12 misses the cutoff) because it introduces Spider-Man's Joker. I personally prefer ten other villains but none of them can support their own series of films, line of toys, etc. The Turtles should always be more valuable, but I'm predicting they continue to hang around in pop culture mediocrity while other characters grow in popularity.

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

8 minutes ago, Smeagol Eye Cherry said:

and GeeksAreMyPeeps and Peter Park also make some good points in this regard.

Of course...but keep in mind, the contention that was made was that Venom was "insanely hot" from the moment he first appeared, and there was an enormous amount of surprise from some posters that that was even disputed.

It is that contention which is inaccurate, for all the thousands of words explaining why in the ensuing discussion. And it is that contention which was springboarded from the discussion re: Secret Wars #8, which also was not "hot" from the day it came out.

I feel like I have to repeat this: relying on memories...especially memories from a time when we were starry eyed adolescents...is unreliable, at best. What is important is what was recorded at the time. And...with all due respect, folks, no one else has provided much of anything in terms of that information (aside from the one 1989 OPG page from waaaaghboss, which is a very good step in the right direction.) If I had my Updates in front of me, I would have posted those, too.

Nobody said that Venom was not popular...whatever that might mean to the individual saying it...but he was also not the hottest thing since sliced bread, either, and would not be for several years.

By 1993? You bet. I doubt there was a hotter comic character on the market in 1993. Not Spidey, not Bats, maybe not even Supes (though, to be fair, the top 5 selling books of the entire year were Superman books.) It was All Venom, All The Time by 1993. No contest. 

But 1989? 1990? 1991? Even into 1992?

No.

24 minutes ago, Smeagol Eye Cherry said:

What I'm actually suggesting is that the Michelinie interview, and merchandise sales, and back issue sales, Halloween costumes and 5th grade lunch table discussions all play a role in determining popularity,

Absolutely. Without a doubt. You get zero dispute from me on that, and, in fact, that corresponds with what I've been saying the entire discussion. 

But it is imperative to acknowledge that that popularity....if it is real...must and will manifest itself in ways that would have been recorded in some way. Otherwise, it's just the fuzzy memories of adolescent boys (and girls, but boys are far worse in this regard), which are among the most notoriously unreliable on the planet, because they combine the lack of critical thinking skills of childhood with the burgeoning, hormonally induced assertiveness and surety of young bucks testing their place in the world.

The last sort of eyewitness you would EVER want in your trial for murder would be 11-13 year old boys.

And no one is immune. I still believe that Back To The Future is a cinematic masterpiece, A Ha was the greatest band of the 80s, and Tom Cruise was the best actor on the planet.

11 minutes ago, Smeagol Eye Cherry said:

I believe you originally said "until Venom became popular in 1993"

I'm pretty sure I didn't say that, or anything like that. Do you have an actual quote? Nobody said Venom wasn't popular before 1993. Here's something I said earlier, on this page: "There's a middle ground in between "Venom was the hottest character on the planet, OMGWTFBBQQQQQQ!!!!" and "Venom? Venom who?""

PS. There have been times when Spawn was the most popular comic book character in the world, just as there have been times when Phil Collins was more popular than Madonna, and Spiderman and Batman are far more popular, worldwide, than Wolverine. It's not even close. Superman, Batman, Spiderman...and Wolvie's a very distant 4th.

 

 

[RockMyAmadeus]

36 minutes ago, Smeagol Eye Cherry said:

then I think Amazing 300 is the most important comic of the Copper Age

I think TMNT #1 edges it out....but quite a lot.

I don't think there's a much room to argue for anything else. Venom is a pop culture icon. The Turtles changed the course of comics.

[Smeagol Eye Cherry]

On 4/1/2019 at 10:14 AM, RockMyAmadeus said:

It wasn't until Venom became popular in 1993 (and yes, even Venom did a slow burn in terms of popularity) that people started paying attention to books like Secret Wars #8 and the other symbiote issues. And, even still, it would be virtually another decade and a half before the book became the "iconic" book it is today.

This was the paragraph where I took the quote from, but I think I understand better what you meant now and agree completely if my understanding is indeed correct. 

I missed the “Venom was insanely hot” assertion someone else must have made. General growing popularity was what I was postulating and that’s why I find two action figures in 1991 and one of the first four Marvel - non X-Men - characters featured, to be such a compelling argument. Hulk, Spider-Man and Punisher make perfect sense. Venom taking that last spot tells me they already knew they had something special. It doesn’t prove insanely hot though. You are absolutely correct about that. 

I also wonder what others think about the influence of fuzzy memories on a list like this, and whether that can sometimes be a good thing. For instance, aren’t some comics more desirable, not because of their importance, but simply because of their immediate impact upon our nostalgia zones? X-Men 94 has this kind of impact on me because it was a big deal when I was growing up, but it’s just a minor key filled with second appearances to my younger friends. Whereas Secret Wars 8 is far more iconic to the youths of today than it is to the more seasoned collectors that frequent these boards. 

[Smeagol Eye Cherry]

1 hour ago, RockMyAmadeus said:

I think TMNT #1 edges it out....but quite a lot.

I don't think there's a much room to argue for anything else. Venom is a pop culture icon. The Turtles changed the course of comics.

I’m terms of value, and impact on the industry, and most any other metric that anyone cares about when compiling a list like this, I wholeheartedly agree. Especially since the Turtles are still popular in general and probably beloved by a certain segment of the community. 

I’m just thinking that if Venom, as a character, is the Spider-Man of Copper Age desirability, then the TMNT are the Fantastic Four. Which is still a pretty big deal. And honestly, maybe Deadpool is the big Kahuna? I think he’s too sweary and murdery, but who knows? 

[RockMyAmadeus]

1 hour ago, Smeagol Eye Cherry said:

On 4/1/2019 at 7:14 AM, RockMyAmadeus said:

It wasn't until Venom became popular in 1993 (and yes, even Venom did a slow burn in terms of popularity) that people started paying attention to books like Secret Wars #8 and the other symbiote issues. And, even still, it would be virtually another decade and a half before the book became the "iconic" book it is today.

This was the paragraph where I took the quote from, but I think I understand better what you meant now and agree completely if my understanding is indeed correct. 

 

Yes, context makes all the difference. 

1 hour ago, Smeagol Eye Cherry said:

I also wonder what others think about the influence of fuzzy memories on a list like this, and whether that can sometimes be a good thing. For instance, aren’t some comics more desirable, not because of their importance, but simply because of their immediate impact upon our nostalgia zones? X-Men 94 has this kind of impact on me because it was a big deal when I was growing up, but it’s just a minor key filled with second appearances to my younger friends. Whereas Secret Wars 8 is far more iconic to the youths of today than it is to the more seasoned collectors that frequent these boards. 

Absolutely! After all, it's why we pay absolutely batpoop insane prices for these used magazines. Nostalgia is why I can sell an X-Men #134 in beautiful condition for $1250, and why I'll bid $25,000...and lose, by the way...on the original cover art to Batman #426. (Honestly, I thought it was in the bag...and I got blown out of the water.  )

It's when we start discussing what actually happened back then, and "I remember it this way" and "well, *I* remember it that way", Killing Joke style, that it becomes a problem. Nothing wrong with fuzzy memories...just keep in mind that those memories aren't worth a darn when it comes to establishing what happened, when, how, and with whom.

As far as X-Men #94 goes...there was a long time when that book was the most important book of the Bronze Age...by a lot. Not GSXM #1, not Conan #1, not Hulk #181, not Cerebus #1, not House of Secrets #92, not Daredevil #158...but X-Men #94. It was, by far, the most valuable Bronze book for well over a decade...perhaps closer to two. It was magic. To own a copy meant you were now among the ranks of the SERIOUS collectors; you weren't playing around anymore. There was a time when it was on par with the likes of ASM #5 and FF #12. Heck, it was even worth the same or more than Batman issues going back to the late 40s!

I would be very sad to see the former King of Bronze reduced to a has-been, a second fiddle, a mere collection of "second appearances"...but, unfortunately, that's the way it goes in this appearance obsessed market.

[Ant-Man]

11 hours ago, F For Fake said:

This is absolutely my recollection. Spider-Man was hot because of McFarlane, and everyone wanted a 298. I picked up a 298 at a country grocery store, ended up trading it to a buddy for his 300, because that seemed like the more interesting book to me. I was in middle school, so that would have been around 89 or 90?

Agreed. I wasn't buying ASM at the time, but I knew to pick up #298 because of Todd. I even grabbed Incredible Hulk #330 for the same reason. ASM #300/Venom was not a consideration. It was about the artist, the crazy webs flying all over the place & the seemingly impossible positions in which Spidey would wide up.

[PeterPark]

On 4/3/2019 at 12:51 AM, RockMyAmadeus said:

It was. Everyone wanted a piece of it. It was the first Image book that actually became worth something fairly substantial. Sure, Spawn, but Spawn was printed out the wazoo, and not hard to find. But Shadowhawk...?

Well, Cap City orders for Spawn #1 were 204,760.

Shadowhawk was a mere 119,075.

The non-foil newsstand is much, MUCH rarer. 

All the image zero coupon books were highly sought after.

[FlyingDonut]

On 4/2/2019 at 1:07 AM, PeterPark said:

I didn't think we meant over-saturation. No, Venom did not over-saturate until 1993 or so although that Darkhawk issue was cerrainly part of that.

As for Cap City, I'm not really sure what that is. And it doesn't look like books sold but rather books ordered. It follows a trend of ordering Todd McFarlane and then Larsen more and more but not ordering based on content other than artist. I wasn't making an argument about ordering.

I'm not really going to get into this, but you are extremely wrong about your beliefs about Venom. Venom didn't become ZOMGVENOM until ASM 375, and even after that the pop for ASM 300 was much further down the line.

The trade paperback you put out earlier was a response directly to Todd McFarlane leaving to go to Image.

Wolverine, Ghost Rider, and Punisher made books sell. Nothing else.

[FlyingDonut]

On 4/2/2019 at 4:57 PM, PeterPark said:

There aren't very reliable price guides for modern books at that time. Price guides don't reflect market sales. Not then anyway and even less so for new books.

This is an objectively untrue statement. There was no other way to price your books. You didn't price based on the yearly Overstreet, you priced on the Update, which was an extremely good barometer of what you should sell for. When Wizard started having a price guide, everyone switched over to using Wizard's price guide, because it was ridiculously high on certain things which allowed you to have some wiggle room.

In 1992 you would BUY at a discount of Overstreet and sell at a multiple of Wizard. It worked out pretty well - until 1993-4 when BOOM.