Getting silly... 0

[Lazyboy]

Just now, rjrjr said:

It seems kind of self serving, doesn't it?  Imagine Wizard magazine claiming the first appearance of a character occurred in a previous issue of Wizard magazine.

Yeah, and even Wizard never stooped that low. That should tell you all you need to know about the accepted definition!

[rjrjr]

13 minutes ago, FineCollector said:

(Edit, someone already mentioned Previews! )

Trading cards have it right... Crosby has a card with his junior team, the Rimouski Oceanic, but it's not a rookie card because he hadn't played in the pros yet.  Same should go for comics: advertising is advertising, but a first appearance doesn't count until it's in a story.  I hate that we have to argue this.

I have no problem if someone wants to say a magazine is a 1st appearance of a character.  But most of us collect comic books, so it is the first appearance in a comic book story that most care about.  It is a rare few who value the panel in a magazine article or an ad in a comic.  And I don't see that changing in my lifetime.

We agree BTW! 

Edited June 1, 2017 by rjrjr

[speedcake]

This seems pretty nuts. We have always had the cameo and the 1st full appearance in the actual story. So if I were to hypothetically have a poster depicting an "exciting new upcoming character!" would that dumb poster be the first appearance to some collectors? I'd say this will never catch on in a meaningful way, but that'd be putting too much faith in people in general. A fool and his money...

[tv horror]

Is it not the same with first appearances concerning teams and the values of the comics, The Avengers, Sinister six, Defenders and JLA all of these character's all had first appearances beforehand. Although I do agree with the appearing next issue as first appearances  if that was the first time they were mentioned. No matter what we think the dealers will always call the shots.  

[Artboy99]

5 hours ago, Lazyboy said:

It wouldn't anyway.

I am so sick of hearing about the Incredible Hulk 181 house ads. Incredible Hulk 180 predated all of them. Incredible Hulk 181 predated two of the three and had the same release date as Daredevil 115.

And yet I have seen lots of auctions ( especially Ebay ) where the advert is used to try to sell the DD 115 book.

[ADAMANTIUM]

51 minutes ago, Artboy99 said:

And yet I have seen lots of auctions ( especially Ebay ) where the advert is used to try to sell the DD 115 book.

How about wolverine 55 I think it was that had x23 as a test tube but it's  not on the cgc label??? I agree it's a nothing book! But since it said x23 on the test tube of that issue, marvel could always mess with our heads and rewrite it as a "first" something or other. I'm more making fun of marvel than anything in saying I wouldn't put it past them. Even though Craig Kyle, creator of x23, said it was pure coincidence. I guess in some cases and in a fictional world nothing is impossible?? I think things like this are cool but not because it is a first appearance.....just neat but who knows what else to call it? 

[Artboy99]

5 minutes ago, ADAMANTIUM said:

How about wolverine 55 I think it was that had x23 as a test tube but it's  not on the cgc label??? I agree it's a nothing book! But since it said x23 on the test tube of that issue, marvel could always mess with our heads and rewrite it as a "first" something or other. I'm more making fun of marvel than anything in saying I wouldn't put it past them. Even though Craig Kyle, creator of x23, said it was pure coincidence. I guess in some cases and in a fictional world nothing is impossible?? I think things like this are cool but not because it is a first appearance.....just neat but who knows what else to call it? 

Wolverine 80...

 

Edited June 2, 2017 by Artboy99

[oakman29]

11 hours ago, Dogsupreme said:

Getting silly...

Ok, I think this needs to be addressed.

I've noticed now that collector's and dealers are saying articles and ads are counting as 1st appearances. I think this is getting out of hand. It should always be in the official capacity of which they debuted in a story.

Do you agree or do you think that non-story debuts count as official first appearances?

Gobbledygook 1 is a great example counting as a 1st app.

[ADAMANTIUM]

3 minutes ago, Artboy99 said:

Wolverine 80...

 

You beat me to it! Thanks for correcting me. I just had to look it up and realized I had the wrong issue #. 

It's worth noting I bought this story as a kid and loved the issues of wolvie fighting cyber. I always wondered what would happen with the old test tube, but I got gyped 

[Artboy99]

Just now, ADAMANTIUM said:

You beat me to it! Thanks for correcting me. I just had to look it up and realized I had the wrong issue #. 

It's worth noting I bought this story as a kid and loved the issues of wolvie fighting cyber. I always wondered what would happen with the old test tube, but I got gyped 

While I own the book it is from an era I never really read. I read the first 20 or so books of that run, then didn't read for about 130 -140 issues and for some reason I started reading again around 160 ( I liked the cover, with T & A  ) and the next thing you know the series was done. Funny how I didn't read backwards, I just kept reading the books coming out.

[ADAMANTIUM]

4 minutes ago, Artboy99 said:

While I own the book it is from an era I never really read. I read the first 20 or so books of that run, then didn't read for about 130 -140 issues and for some reason I started reading again around 160 ( I liked the cover, with T & A  ) and the next thing you know the series was done. Funny how I didn't read backwards, I just kept reading the books coming out.

I enjoyed the 66 cover from the 1988 series that's where I stopped reading, after opening that book as a 10 year old and being a little freaked out

 

[SteppinRazor]

9 hours ago, Martin Sinescu said:

It's not just dealers hyping them. Plenty of collectors out there want the glory of uncovering a "hidden gem" such as these obscure appearances.

Yep.  There is a natural effect in collectibles that lends to continually looking for the rare or different.  Exclusivity is part and parcel of it.  'Oh, you have IH 181?  Well, I have IH 180 where Wolverine really shows up'.  'Oh yeah, well I have Ludicrous Comic #72, where a guy who loks like a guy who looks like Wolverine is silhouetted, which turns out to be Wolverine in disguise!'

[Ken Aldred]

Don't forget the must-have Foom 2.

Essential addition to any Wolverine collection.

 

Edited June 2, 2017 by Ken Aldred

[Ken Aldred]

18 minutes ago, SteppinRazor said:

  'Oh yeah, well I have Ludicrous Comic #72, where a guy who loks like a guy who looks like Wolverine is silhouetted, which turns out to be Wolverine in disguise!'

Is that a Venom or Sabretooth reference? I forget. There was something similar, I'm sure. 

Edited June 2, 2017 by Ken Aldred

[SteppinRazor]

Just now, Ken Aldred said:

Is that a Venom or Sabretooth reference?. I forget. There was something similar.

I wish I could claim such depth of knowledge, but I just pulled it out of my apse

[rjrjr]

4 hours ago, Ken Aldred said:

Don't forget the must-have Foom 2.

Essential addition to any Wolverine collection.

 

[Dogsupreme]

11 hours ago, ADAMANTIUM said:

How about wolverine 55 I think it was that had x23 as a test tube but it's  not on the cgc label??? I agree it's a nothing book! But since it said x23 on the test tube of that issue, marvel could always mess with our heads and rewrite it as a "first" something or other. I'm more making fun of marvel than anything in saying I wouldn't put it past them. Even though Craig Kyle, creator of x23, said it was pure coincidence. I guess in some cases and in a fictional world nothing is impossible?? I think things like this are cool but not because it is a first appearance.....just neat but who knows what else to call it? 

Oh great! Now I gotta go check out WOLVERINE 80. Lucky I have an issue.

Edited June 2, 2017 by Dogsupreme

[Dogsupreme]

It's one thing to be part of the story. That is ok in my book. It's fun to look up continuity. It's stuff like this....

Claiming to be the "first" appearance....

[ygogolak]

14 hours ago, Lazyboy said:

But there is and has been for years. Show us the first time that advertising material of any type was referred to as a first appearance in any comic-related publication.

Not sure why Preacher Preview isn't labeled as such...but how about this guy?

[ygogolak]

2 minutes ago, Dogsupreme said:

It's one thing to be part of the story. That is ok in my book. It's fun to look up continuity. It's stuff like this....

Claiming to be the "first" appearance....

That's not them on the cover?

I'm not sure how people can argue Hulk 180 as a first appearance but a full blown cover is not.