Subject 06: Cameos VS First Full Appearances


One of my favorite debates is about Darkseid's appearances in Superman’s Pal Jimmy Olsen #134 vs Forever People #1. Let me ask you this question: if both books are in comparable condition, priced the same and you were able to see exactly what you are buying (meaning the content inside), which would you buy?

Don't answer that, it's rhetorical. I just wanted to get the blood boiling.


Also, I lied… I really couldn't care less about Darkseid's first appearance. There's no way on earth (or Earth 2 for that matter) I would buy a copy of Superman’s Pal Jimmy Olsen #134, at any price.

However, that doesn't mean you shouldn't.

Regardless of where you stand on the whole Cameo vs Full Appearance debate, at the end of the day we all should want whatever is best for the market. There's no good reason to not distinguish the difference between a “cameo” and a “first full appearance”. Call it a “first appearance cameo”, I really don't care. The word “cameo” needs to be included when appropriate. It's a big part of why I write about comics and appearances. Not to affect value on the market, but rather to help folks avoid the wrong books. 

The wrong book is going to depend entirely on YOU. For me, it's CAMEOS!


Here's an example of the wrong book for any Harley Quinn fan, Batman Adventures #11. It's the first “Mention” of Harley Quinn. What people don’t tell you in many cases is that it's in the letters page. If you're a Man-Bat fan or you're trying to complete a run of BA, you need it. However, I think we all can agree it doesn't need to be marked up because of two words in the letters page. Leave the BA#11's for the Man-Bat fans, their key books are expensive enough already.


Taskmaster – Avengers #195 is his first “Cameo” appearance. Avengers #196 is the first cover and first full appearance. Marvel Team-Up #103 is the second full Taskmaster appearance and cover. Simple. I don't know about you, but I'd think people would want books with Taskmaster doing…well, Taskmaster stuff, like stepping on Ant-Man.


Here's a straightforward example: Shado – Green Arrow the LongBow Hunter #1. Now unless you're a Green Arrow or Mike Grell fan, you're probably wondering who is Shado? If you're reading the Green Arrow Rebirth series, the woman with the red dragon tattoo, that's Shado. The LongBow Hunters was a 3 issue mini series and pretty much covers anything a speculator could want pertaining to Shado. Issue 1 is a full appearance, issue 2 is first cover and all 3 issues combined form the origin story. Simple. It's nothing complicated, nothing to debate.

DetectiveComics_spoilerDetective Comics #647 – first appearance of Stephanie Brown and first cameo appearance of the Spoiler. It could also be argued that Stephanie's two appearances are brief and therefore a double cameo. Regardless, this book is key all day. Detective Comics #648 is the first full appearance of Spoiler, it's also key. Should it trump #647? No, but it's not worthless either, both books have value. Not to mention Detective Comics #649 is part 3 of the story arc… so I guess all 3 have value.

Steppenwolf – his first full appearances is New Gods #7 (it's a full appearance, he's on the cover). Simple. He appeared over the years in many different books, almost none of those appearances amount to more than a cameo. A panel here, a page there. Even his first New 52 appearance in Justice League #6 is only a cameo. I don't think he makes anywhere close to a full appearance until Justice League #42. Even that's a stretch. Honestly, two of Steppenwolf's larger appearance are in Earth 2 #1 and Earth 2 #8 of all places.


Let's get to last week's poster child for exactly WHY there needs to be a clearer definition between what's a cameo and a first appearance. Invincible Iron Man #7, I’d classify as the “first cameo appearance” of Riri Williams…it's exactly two panels. To be completely honest, I’d call Invincible Iron Man #9 a second cameo. Not really a full appearance since it's 3 pages.  Even though she is on the cover as Iron Man… I really don’t feel we’ve seen a full appearance for Riri….At least not at the time of writing this.

Wonder Woman #7 (1987) First Barbara Ann Minerva appearance. Wonder Woman #9 has the backstory, Cheetah's on the cover and makes a large enough appearance… I’m cool with just owning #9. In the New 52, her first “cameo” appearance is in the form of a hologram in Justice League #10. It's a group shot and they are all really tiny. Justice League #13-14 are probably the issues you want, she's on the cover and both are full appearances. Also, she shows up in Suicide Squad Volume 4 issues #20, #22 & #23… There might be more, that's just of the top of my head.

gat-cheetahDon't misunderstand, I’m not saying a cameo should have more or less value either way. But let's look at the word “cameo” and see what Merriam/Webster has to say about this.

“a brief appearance or role”

Ok, so what does “brief” mean?
“lasting only a short period of time”

By very definition, a “cameo” is THE EXACT SAME THING many first appearances boil down to. I get that there are people that believe, cameo or not, it's the first appearance because it's literally the first appearance. Fine, call it a cameo. I don't always buy that argument anyways. A toothy grin floating in a panel of black doesn't cut it for me, literally or figuratively.


Personally, I don't need my collection full of books with panels of teeth and whatever other nonsense people are peddling. If a single panel is the sole reason the book has value, fine, list it properly. For me, a book needs more. Hot artist, character appearances, new series, new creative team/direction, two characters slugging it out or whatever. In case you haven't noticed, I'm a sucker for books where characters actually fight for more than a page.


All these factors all help determine the value of a book, they're selling points. Also, they're the exact same selling points dealers have no problem using to promote a book. So why is listing something as a “first cameo” and a “first full” such a big deal? I mean, beside potentially losing money, obviously….Sadly, there really isn't one.

All of you reading this combined have more power and influence than you realize. It's completely up to you what you ultimately buy or invest in. Wouldn't you like to know if you're really buying one panel or 6 pages? I do!


Selling comics is a very predatory market. The practice of buying low and selling high is exactly like the stock market… and like on Wall Street, there are deceptive and ruthless people everywhere. I firmly believe we need a better system of categorizing early appearances that is accurate, specific and transparent. Calling a “first appearance” of a character a “first appearance” when it's only a panel or two isn't going to cut it anymore. By any logical definition that's a “cameo” and should be listed as such. You can call it a “first appearance” all day, that's fine, but the word “cameo” needs to be there too.

Till Next Week, keep your slabs stiff, your comics dry and the world will turn.


  • Alondo

    You absolutely killed it in this article, Skot. Thanks for doing the leg work to research this and help “educate the masses”.

    • Skot Whitman

      At the end of the day man, I just want want cameos listed as such… I’m sick of getting swindled into buying books for a single panel. Hopefully, we’re getting a little closer to that.

      Thank you for reading and commenting!

  • Topher

    Often speculators get bogged down by focusing on that “one ” book to buy then sell and it’s often a first appearance. A collector will often want and place value upon many key books concerning a property they love. If I am a fan of Darkseid then Olsen 134 is high on my list. If I am selling books then I am going to want to buy, flip and hype the book that the market says is most capable of making me profit.
    There is an industry guide book which defines a first as ” the first time a character appears anywhere.” Your dictionary definition of Cameo says ” brief appearance ” I see the word “appearance” and right away I know that a cameo can be a FIRST appearance. It might be brief but it’s an appearance none the less. Overstreet’s definition is pretty clear cut but agendas that have to do with profiting off books sometimes get in the way. This is why you can’t use the market as a tool for determining the first appearance.
    You may personally prefer to own a book with more panels containing your favorite character. That is a personal preference and I respect it but it does not mean cameos cannot be firsts or that buyers should beware of key books with cameos. Many collectors also have a completist mentality. Gotta own em all right? I collect anything Larfleeze. His first appearance is a cameo in GL 25. He is pictured in one splash page and is unnamed. Is that not his first? He’s doing some real damage in that panel. He is not speaking but man that’s a dynamic shot and I instantly said, ” who is the orange bad-ass and where can I learn more?” Maybe readers saw Darkseid on that screen and said the same thing. That makes the book pretty darn important and it should not be discounted. Larfleeze’s second appearance is a shadowy cameo in Decisions 0. So is that also not his first appearance? Do I really have to wait until GL 41 to because he’s on the cover and does more on panel that the previous two books I mentioned? No. All are key but only one is a first.

    I always find it funny when people argue for or against a books and bring up the cameo vs first thing. So why can’t all those taskmaster books be considered key books? Why does Invincible Iron Man 7 defy your argument and sell for more than #9? Is it possible that those with larger voices can push their own agendas to sway the market? The smart collector or speculator can see this and act accordingly. I don’t pay any attention to the agendas of sellers because I can determine the truth for myself based on my own research, like every buyer should.

    “Calling a “first appearance” of a character a “first appearance” when it’s only a panel or two isn’t going to cut it anymore”

    I just don’t see this as being a true statement. Is that because I write an article called True Firsts?! Well yes, that is part of why I am replying but here is another example of why I do not agree:

    This is really the cover effect and it has been happening for years. Tell me, why is Archangel’s first X-Factor 24 when he appears in more than one panel in X-Factor 23 but Gwenpool’s first can’t be a first because she appears on the cover of a book but not the interior prior to Howard the Duck 1? Yep it’s confusing.

    If you want to say that Howard the Duck 1 is Gwenpool’s first appearance ( in a story ) then fine. That variant may even be more valuable or desirable to collectors but it is simply not her first appearance. Even the marketplace is confused on many, many books. If we go with an industry definition then we can say that Gwenpool’s first appearance is on the cover of Book A and her first story in in Book B. Both should be desirable to both collectors and flippers. We don’t need to bash the cameo ( by the way even CGC has labeled books that have cameos as first appearances ), what we need is to see the value in key books and go from there. Invincible Iron Man 7 and 9 are key Riri books. Let the market decide which sells for a few dollars more but remember that her first appearance is in issue 7.

    Your article is awesome by the way. Keep it up!

    • Skot Whitman

      As always, thanks for commenting Topher.

      We are in closer agreement (over all) than it may appear… that’s partially my fault trying to type 1200 words.
      I’m not disputing a first cameo being key. I’m not even disputing it being a first appearance or more valuable. I am disputing appearances not have the word cameo attached when appropriate. Consumers have a right to know.

      Gwenpool’s first appearance is Deadpool SSW#2 and it’s a “first appearance, cover only” and that’s how it should be listed. Howard the duck #1 is a first full Gwenpool and second cover on 1:25 variant only.

      Honestly if I had my way there would be a distinction between a single panel cameo and a full page splash cliffhanger cameo… because cliffhanger cameos can be really cool.

      This wasn’t about trying to lessen the importance of a cameo, more about the importance of listing them as such. If I was trying to discredit cameos I would have started with something like… Wolverine #80.

      again, thank you for reading and commenting. I greatly appreciate respect your perspective.

    • Avatar

      I like your Gwenpool example. It also works with Red Hulk. Hulk 1 is listed as his first appearance on CGC, but he never appears in the comic. He doesn’t show up until issue 2. So why is that handled differently?

      I am definitely in the literal first appearance camp. If a character appeared for the first time, it’s only logical that it is the first appearance. The “full” appearance can still be key for entertainment and aesthetic value, but I think the actual first holds the historical value.

      The Darkseid example always bugs me. I own almost all of the Kirby New Gods stuff, so I can flip through and compare them. Yes, he only appears for a panel on a computer screen in Jimmy Olsen, but he only appears for an additional panel in the same capacity in Forever People–it’s really a stretch to call that a full appearance. I don’t think he actually fully appeared in a story (and on the cover) until New Gods 3, but there were at least 3 appearances (“cameos”) before that.

      • Avatar

        Edit: nevermind, I flipped back through Forever People #1 and he definitely appears for more than a couple of panels.

        • Skot Whitman

          Kirby’s Darkseid stuff is tough. We know he intentional added the Darkseid panel in in SPJO to lay ground work for the New Gods stuff… It was probably a bad example to use in hindsight since it’s one of the few books that is properly listed by CGC as a cameo.

  • Avatar

    This is why I hate when “the creator stated this was their first appearance” and people latch on to that. Take Walking Dead, Alpha’s first appearance. Obviously, duh, her first appearance is Walking Dead 138. No skin mask, full physical appearance, first mentioned by name. First full appearance. Walking Dead 132? The one everyone’s decided is her first appearance. Skin mask on, and no mention of name. In fact, I believe, only one line is even mentioned in one panel. Yet this is her first appearance because Kirkman “said so.” Drives me crazy.

    This kind of mentality would mean Constantine’s first appearance was actually in Swamp Thing 25 (Alan Moore stated this was, indeed, Constantine. How is this any different than Alpha’s first appearance? In fact, you actually see his face!), or Venom’s first appearance was in Amazing Spider-Man 298. I just wish the community as a whole would come up with a solid decision as to what cameo vs. first appearance means, and stick to it. Minimum number of panels, minimum number of word balloons, actual physical appearance (not in shadow, etc.) But until we do, this will just continue…

    • Skot Whitman

      Thanks for reading and commenting!

      The problem is not that the writer states it, it that people refuse to make the distinction as to size of the appearance because the writer states it. It can be her first appearance, but it’s still a cameo. It doesn’t mean it’s not key, it means you want me to pay $15 bucks for a raw #132, I have every right to know that i’m paying for a single panel… or whatever, I don’t read walking dead.

      As consumers that are expected to plunk down big money on some of these book we have a right to know. There’s only so much research we can do on our own with many books… Short of buying them and figuring it out. I’m sick of having to do that because I can’t get a straight answer out of people because they are trying to protect their investment.

  • Gwenpool4President

    It is a lot clearer for me, a first cameo is a first appearance.

    That doesn’t mean other early appearances are worthless by any means, but there is only one 1st appearance. it can murky to determine, at times, with adds or other random things. For the most part, if a character is seen for the first time, that is their 1st appearance. Bat-Man of China and Wonder-Woman of China’s 1st appearance should be in New Super-Man #1. That was the first time they were in a book, that is their 1st appearance.

    Often times when I see “1st Full Appearance”, that registers as “2nd Appearance” to me.

    • Skot Whitman

      That’s totally fine too. And maybe that’s the solution, to list books that are the first full appearance as a second appearance/first Full… except that doesn’t fix the issue of a consumer’s right to know the size of a first appearance prior to investing.

      I’m not saying that a first cameo isn’t key… I guess what i’m saying is a first appearance not listed as a cameo, when it only encompases a few panels, is intentionally deceptive in the current market.

      Yes, eBay seems to be where this happens far too often. However part of that is do to people who fill in wiki’s and post online.

      Thanks for reading and commenting, Viva GwenPool!

  • Gwenpool4President

    “I can get murky…”*

  • Gwenpool4President


    I need an edit button lol

  • Avatar

    Awesome read!!!

  • Avatar

    “It is a lot clearer for me, a first cameo is a first appearance.” – If ONLY ebay saw it that way! 😉 LOL

  • Avatar

    We all want the first app to be a full app, but were also leaving money on the table by ignoring the market. If the market says the cameo is worth money well not getting it is only hurting ourselves and our pocket. In a perfect world all first app should be full but if its not we just got to roll with it. Like the new wally west for example. His first app is in Flash 30 he shows up dead and in a newspaper, but because his seen in the “future” it doesint count? and DC comics and everyone else has Flash annual 3 as his first app why because he shows up in present time in prime earth? Flash 30 was published a week before Flash annual 3, and there the same character! So now go and change the market and draw people a picture with crayons so they can understand that.

    • Skot Whitman

      Look, I’m really not debating that a first appearance, cameo or not is not a first appearances. I’m saying that not listing short appearances or single panel first appearances as a cameo is intentionally deceptive.

      People will still buy the key cameos 1st appearances regardless but they deserve to know they just paid $1200 for a 9.6 slab of what amounts to a single panel.

      If people start listing appearances appropriately, the market will correct itself uninfluenced, no crayon drawing required.

      • Avatar

        There is even a bigger problem right now thats going on in the market. Every character has a clear cut 1st alp cameo or full but, the problem right now is there are characters that have 1st app that are being disregarded by DC because they showed up in a different timeline. So instead of saying this is there 1st app.
        They just look past it. Perfect example is New Wally West. He made his first app in Flash 30.
        Howeverr DC database looks at it as this is a different character, same name but different character because he was in a different timeline. Now all of a suddn Same Person, Same Look, Sam Name same everything shows
        Up in Flash Annul 3 and this is claiming this as his first app why? Because its his first app in prime earth. So i say forget cameos and full app, this is a hot mess. If ur gonna bring a character in, just brinf him in and call it his first. Dont give me same look same desgin same name and say it dont count cause he was in a different timeline. As of right now dc database says flash annual 3 is the debit of the new wally west, even though flash 30 was published a week earlier.

  • Avatar

    I always look to hulk 180 and 181 as prime examples of cameo and first full. Quite similar to taskmasters cameos and first app. One that really stumps me is spawn. According to cgc spawns first app is spawn #1 but where does that leave Malibu sun #13? As that is regarded as an early spawn app or is that his first?? Or is that considered a non first app ??

    • Avatar

      I think Spawn goes Rust #1 First preview as this is a full 1 pg B/W ad, then Malibu #13 1st cover 1st Spawn in color, then Spawn #1 1st full. I’ve owned Hulk #181 for a decade now, I just recently bought #180. Owning both is equally as important to me. Best advice I’ve taken when it comes to cameo vs 1st is buy every issue that could questionably be considered a 1st appearance of the character your after that way you don’t have to be on either side of the argument, you don’t have to argue at all…

      • Avatar

        also you can debate Harley Quinn appearing before BA#12 in a coloring book one page pinup that is in comic format and size, and a Golden children’s book as well that comes with a cassette tape Batman Almost got IM

    • Skot Whitman

      Spawn #1 has a huge print run as does Wildcats #1. So Malibu Sun issues have an infinitely smaller print runs and did come out first. That’s the short answer.

  • Drclix

    I agree with Gwenpool4president – a first appearance is a first appearance. I guess I’m fortunate that I haven’t bought an ebay book in a long time, but it’s a shame that sellers would stoop to claiming “first” tactics in their descriptions just to generate sales. For me, the first time I see a character, that’s their first appearance. If they only mention it in the text, that’s not an appearance. Thanks for writing this!

  • Avatar

    Great article!! For my own sanity I’ve always used first appearance for the very first time the character is seen in full. I use first full appearance for multiple panel/cover/entire issue. I use cameo for the first hand/teeth/outline etc. I also put no value on the ad first appearances. I don’t care if whatever issue 45 had an ad for an upcoming book.

    • Skot Whitman

      Hi, thanks for commenting!

      I think the type of stuff with the ads is like this whole other level of super collector status like Topher writes about. Some people are completionists, they can buy the cameos. That’s all cool, people can go buy that stuff and it can be worth all the money.

      I hate being swindled by ambiguity when it comes to appearances. I want the first full, not cameos. List cameos as cameo… call it a first cameo appearance, as long as it has cameo in the description. i don’t know why this is so hard… well I do, but that’s not good enough.

  • Avatar

    As a collector first and middling speculator second, I can only say that cameos allow me a cheap alternative to popular characters. Going back to Hulk 180 v 181, I could only afford the Hulk 180 because the market loves Hulk 181, and for good reason: iconic first appearance on cover!! Okay…he is also seen in several interior pages and plays a key role in the story, too…But the Hulk 180 is way undervalued for Wolverine’s Entrance into the Marvel Universe in that last panel on the final page. Seriously, what a memorable start to his career! That’s how I think the market should judge cameos/first appearances…by the character’s first “wow” entrance. But that’s just me.

  • merlin

    I really can’t see any problem with people in the comic biz learning and using the word cameo when appropriate. I think jo 134 is right on the edge of what could be considered dubious in terms of even a cameo, if cameos also include single panels depicting full costumes and dialog. You don’t even get darkseid’s full head in his first (cameo) appearance. Maybe that’s a solution, to put “cameo” in parenthesis to show it’s not denying the appearance for me the whole cameo thing is pretty straightforward in most cases. Obviously wolverine 80 is not a cameo, it’s an accident or someone couldn’t think of a name so they dug around. Unless whover wrote “x-23” on that test tube says “yeah, that was Laura Kinney all along” (who would believe that?) it’s just nothing.

    In a sense, last page cameos (ASM 299, hulk 180 etc.) are really jut advertisements for the next issue, and could be classified in a similar category as previews and ads. If the word “full” is confusing (I can see all of him!), maybe we could expand the vocabulary to include (extended) and (brief), and since so many key books have their insides locked down go head and put (cover) in parenthesis too.

    Now all we need is to define these words very clearly. So, (cameo) could mean “partial figure/in shadow/hand” etc., where (brief) means “you get the whole thing, on a single panel or page”, and (extended)…. The jury’s out on that one. I agree with pretty much everything you have said here Skot, except the three page cameo. I think that’s possibly pushing it. Some iconic comic stories in the silver age were like 6 pages total, so that’d be half the story. I dunno, maybe comic creators don’t use the page like they used to. Obviously (cover), like it says, and for books which contain all of the above, call it a plain jane “first appearance”. If it’s a full blown first except the cover, label it as “first (non-cover) appearance” so whoever buys the slab knows Riri isn’t a red headed white girl. The only thing that seems clear enough already is “in costume”, but that will also need to be notated parenthetically. You may have noticed I avoided “full” entirely, as it is misleading by definition in this context and probably the source of a lot of strife. Great article, got the blood boiling with this one. I think a thread in the forum dedicated to defining (extended) appearances could hopefully clear the air a little, but I’m gonna wait for someone else to start it. Sorry for the essay, sheesh!(again!)

    • Avatar

      Your post is spot on (as well as this article). But we don’t need dictionary definitions to help us understand what a “cameo” is in this hobby, versus a full appearance.

      Let’s not forget (I know it’s easy to now days) that comics are a STORY TELLING medium. A teaser of a new character in a last page or lurking in the background in a panel , whether they can be seen in full, or not, have any dialogue , or not, or scream out their name, or not, is a cameo. This has been accepted in the hobby since at least Overstreet has been published, and certainly has was unofficially accepted long before that. Hence, while hulk 180 is literally wolverine’s “first appearance”, it is however a non-substantive cameo appearance at the end of a Wendigo story and it is thus valued appropriately when compared to 181, which in fact both figuratively and literally “introduces” is to Wolverine in a full, official and proper manner.

      • Skot Whitman

        you’re right, what we really need is ethics, and I don’t think a dictionary term is going to fix that. sadly ethics (or lack there of) is what I think most of the problems in this hobby really come down to.

        Many of the wall books today would fit the non-substantive cameo appearance like Hulk 180. While others are legit first appearance, is it something someone other than a completionist and super collectors really needs? That’s why I think there’s needs to be more transparency in in how we classify these books.

        To this very day I can’t get a straight answer when I ask someone about a copy of Wonder Woman (1987) #7 they have for sale. It’s a simple question “Does Cheetah actually appear in this issue. Not Barbara, Cheetah, in cheetah from.” tells me this conversation is loooooong overdue and needs to start being addressed more formally.

        A catch all for everything isn’t going to be possible however getting this discussion out there and hopefully continuing it is what’s best for the hobby long term.

      • Topher

        I think Wolverine 180 suffers form the same problem I mentioned above, the cover effect . There was no internet to quickly correct the problem and like X-Factor 23 people went with the cool cover appearance which came one issue after the first. While I agree that comics are a story-telling medium many buyers put a higher premium on cover art, variants, rarity, CGC signature books etc. over story. If the narrative is so important for collectors then books like Strikeforce Morituri, Flaming Carrot, Scud, Severed, Akiko on the Planet Smoo, Groo, on and on and on would be worth a whole lot more. Any fan worth a damn reads the books but collectors are buying for many reasons and it often has nothing to do with the story. I believe that is Hulk 180 came out today it would be instantly deemed the first appearance of Wolverine.

    • Skot Whitman

      As always man, thanks for commenting. Cliffhanger cameos are absolutely an advertisement. In some cases an entire issue could be just leading up to that revival to sell the next issue.

      I think this debate hasn’t even really started yet, this is just the first shots fired. 3 pages, 6 pages 2 panels it’s crazy that we live in a world where everything has to be spelled out. Stories are fluid and I think trying to set up a set of arbitrary rules is only going to make things worst and in part is how we got here in the first place.

      Many “newly discovered” appearances and cameos only trump the full based on a cover date. Many collectors today do not realize these books they fish out of the dollar bin were there for a reason, they didn’t find something that was missed. Hulk 180 is a great example of a book collectors believed was not important. For decades that was fine with the market until someone decided they could argue it and profit from it. That’s the real problem, monetary gain. Money is why it’s going to be next to impossible to correct the market without a civil war bloodbath.

  • oldmilwaukee6er

    First appearance=
    1. Character or person or creature appears in full (you see them, not just part)
    2. Character is named (or already named in past)
    3. Character is part of the storyline (#IH180cliffhanger)

    Anything short of all three criteria is a cameo.

  • Avatar

    I believe it ends up on what people own.

    If you own a copy of Forever People #1 but don’t own SPJO #134 there is a very good chance you are going to push until your dying breath the Forever People #1 and being Darkseids 1st App. Especially if you are selling saif FP #1 comic.

    Same thing with Hulk 180 vs 181.

    I still believe that SPJO being considered Drakseids 1st App is laughable. I mean it’s his face on a monitor and he also looks nothing like the character as potrayed in Forever People #1. But a cameo apperance deninitely.

    And to answer your question Skot, I would chise or buy a copy of Forever People #1 any day over a copy of SPJO and this is coming from a guy who owns both copies.

    And don’t get me started on Carnage’s 1st App (ASM 360 vs ASM 361) or even worse, Doomsday!

    • Skot Whitman

      That’s exactly the problem. It comes down to do you have a horse in this race. If the answer is yes, then that will affect their stance.

      That’s what will always make this discussion more problematic. There can’t be an honest discussion do to people trying to protect their investment and what’s right for the market be damned.

  • pumpkinpunker

    My favorite is when sellers try to claim Uncanny X-force #4 is the first appearance of Kidpocalypse (Evan Sabahnur) because it has such a low print run. Nope, the only reason this issue has value is because of its low print run on a great story.

  • Avatar

    Great article. I agree we do need a better system of categorizing early appearances that is accurate, specific and transparent. This community can set the standard for a new system.

  • Avatar

    Wow, you really stirred up some conversation! Well written, well done.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.