To begin with, let me clarify; while I admittedly made a point last time about being open to reconsidering my stance on Key Issues if new evidence emerged, it appears I was not entirely mistaken – merely ahead of schedule.
To begin with, I’d like to shed some light on a few points that have consistently intrigued me. My main interest and worry haven’t revolved around whether Key Issues truly exist, but rather our overwhelming fixation on them. It’s been evident that any top-ranked comic or new character introduction could reasonably be considered significant in a series.
In the early Overstreet Price Guides, there was a section called “Scarcity of Comic Books,” which concludes with these words: “In most cases, the first issues are the most sought after, with origin issues coming second, and issues featuring special artists third. This ‘heightened demand’ creates scarcity for these specific comics, leading to increased prices. Unless collecting habits drastically change in the near future, this trend should persist.”
This brings me to my central argument, which highlights our current fixation on Key Issues. Additionally, this obsession encompasses first appearances. My observations aim to address this fixation that has gripped us today, as it tends to overemphasize Key Issues at the expense of the rest of the series, a fact we should remember given how comics’ values have always been listed in price guides. The focus is on the series…not just the Key Issues.
Initially, I believed manipulated Key Issue prices began appearing in the mid-eighties, but further investigation reveals these price increases started earlier than I initially assumed. Regardless, my main argument remains valid; the way we currently understand and inflate the prices of Key Issues is a relatively recent development. For more details, you can find them in my previous essay linked here.
Regarding my initial query about who or what caused the escalating costs associated with an increasing number of Key Issues, we can point directly to the Overstreet Price Guide as the primary source. Although initially met with skepticism by the collecting community, this guide eventually gained popularity within fandom due to its ability to boost the worth of a comic collection through suggestions of specific “right books.” The guide’s influence on pricing seems undeniable, considering all factors involved. It’s plausible that the Overstreet Price Guide, alongside the Gerber Photo Guides and Wizard Magazine, played a significant role in inflating prices.
The controversy lies in determining how much the Overstreet Price Guide influenced the higher pricing (by its advisors intentionally promoting certain comics) as opposed to simply reflecting market trends (what collectors were actually purchasing). The guide’s pricing appears impartial, but when you consider that the price is primarily determined by advisors with a financial stake in driving demand for specific comics, doubts arise. In essence, does the perceived value of a comic stem from the guide or does the guide merely mirror the market’s interests? This process has always seemed questionable to me.
It’s essential to highlight that the growth in a comic’s value, as indicated in the Overstreet Price Guide, relies on the collaborative insights of its advisors. In an interview uploaded on YouTube in July 2024, veteran advisor Mark Wilson discussed their annual weekend meetings with Bob Overstreet to discuss market trends and determine how they might affect a comic’s value. According to Wilson, this process was quite preliminary. During the interview, Wilson noted that a comic’s desirability often stemmed from collectors seeking to complete a series, as was more common in fandom’s early years, even extending into the early eighties. This should not come as a surprise given comics’ monthly production and sequential numbering, which creates story or title runs.
Another factor Wilson emphasized is that until the 1980s, there was no significant financial incentive for investing in comics. Consequently, people collected comics primarily because they enjoyed them. This could potentially explain the sudden emergence of Key Issues. Could this shift towards financial rewards have been intentional? Possibly, but it’s worth noting that the Overstreet Price Guide was already using terms like “investing” and “speculating” as early as 1976. Interestingly, the term “Key books” only appeared in a revised section of the “Scarcity of Comic Books” in the 1980 edition. Here, for what seems to be one of the first instances, the term “Key books” was used in a new paragraph focusing on condition.
Returning to Wilson’s observations: Today, he suggests, the comic market has evolved into a more financial arena. However, this transformation creates challenges as people are eager to make substantial profits quickly. Consequently, manipulation of the market became prevalent. (Note: These last two sentences are my interpretation based on Wilson’s statements.)
To put it simply, let’s examine the data now. I bought 5 old Overstreet Price Guides: #6-1976, #7-1977, #8-1978, #9-1979, and #10-1980. By referring to these guides, we can eliminate doubts about price discrepancies caused by condition differences, as seen in dealers’ catalogs during that time. I’m excluding the first issues (#1s) because they are usually the most expensive. Instead, my focus is on comics midway through a series that stand out from surrounding issues, disrupting the run. Although not exhaustive, this list offers a glimpse into different periods. The table below lists the 16 comics in question. If you see a dash, it means the book was priced with no increase in cost. Where an increase has occurred, I’ve compared the price to similar comics from the previous run.
| COMIC | Date | OV-1976 | OV-1977 | OV-1978 | OV-1979 | OV-1980 |
| Batman 121 | Feb. 59 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Amazing Spiderman 14 | July 64 | – | – | – | – | $30 / $36 |
| Batman 171 | May 65 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Batman 181 | June 66 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Fantastic Four 48 | Mar. 66 | – | – | $6 / $12 | $7.50 / $21 | $9 / $24 |
| Fantastic Four 49 | Apr. 66 | – | – | $6 / $7.50 | $7.50 / $10.50 | $9 / $12 |
| Fantastic Four 52 | July 66 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Amazing Spiderman 50 | July 67 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Batman 227 | Dec. 70 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Amazing Spiderman 121 | Mar. 73 | – | 45¢ / $3 | $1.20 / $6 | $1.80/$9 | $1.80 / $15 |
| Conan 23 | Feb. 73 | – | – | $4.50 / $6 | – | – |
| Tomb of Dracula 10 | July 73 | – | – | $1.50 / $1.80 | $1.80/$2.10 | $3 / $3.75 |
| Amazing Spiderman 129 | Jan. 74 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Hulk 181 | Oct. 74 | – | – | 75¢ / $1.20 | – | $1.20 / $3.75 |
| Werewolf by Night 32 | Aug 75 | – | – | – | – | – |
| Iron Fist 14 | Aug. 77 | – | – | 80¢ / $3 |
The significant rise in the value of important comic books, particularly those featuring Spider-Man, seems to have truly kicked off in the late seventies. However, this is not a complete picture of what was going on at the time. For instance, even up until 1980, classic series like Amazing Spider-Man followed a specific pricing pattern: older issues were more expensive due to their age, while newer ones were cheaper. This pattern held true for the first 60+ issues of the series, with no significant exceptions or inflated prices.
One exception to this rule was ASM 121, which featured “The Death of Gwen Stacey” and started showing higher prices within its run as early as 1977. By 1978, a few more issues followed suit, and by 1980, nearly half of the books in our collection were considered key issues with increased values. Interestingly, Amazing Spider-Man #50 did not experience any increase in its key issue status until as late as 1980, despite numerous other anomalies such as special artists’ editions.
In as early as 1976, the price of Batman #219 by Neal Adams was higher than that of #227. This unusual price difference persisted for several years before #227 eventually surpassed it. Interestingly, similar price fluctuations were common in issues where artists changed. It’s also worth noting that for a long time, the first appearances in these comics didn’t seem to significantly affect their prices. However, this trend began to change around 1980, gradually escalating and eventually becoming a rapid increase. Shifting the start date of this process by a few years doesn’t diminish my main point. We can now see how the focus on ‘Key Issues’ has grown to such an extent that it’s influencing the comic collecting hobby in potentially distorted ways, as Mark Wilson observed. This process was likely incomplete, arbitrary, and perhaps even self-serving based on our analysis of early Overstreet Price Guides.
In my previous essay, I pointed out that labeling “there have always been keys” as a simplification of the hobby is accurate. Although initial editions or first appearances have always been highly sought-after, it’s essential to remember that during the early days, there were more run collectors. This meant that almost every issue was considered a “key” when trying to find it. Long-time collectors from the 60s and much of the 70s seldom pursued Key Issues as avidly as they do today. It appears that the obsession with Key Issues has only recently emerged because these are the issues perceived as having worth. Nowadays, it seems that value is what matters most.
As a movie reviewer, I find myself grappling with an unsettling trend in the comic book world – the proliferation of “Key Issues.” It seems that almost anyone with a YouTube channel can declare a book as “key” based on the flimsiest of reasons: a third appearance, a new costume, a last issue, a variant cover, a new gadget, a first cover or cameo appearance. This trend has become so rampant that an old-school dealer once lamented to me, “there are too many keys.”
In essence, today’s comic book enthusiasts are eagerly seizing any excuse to declare a Key Issue. Fueled by the fear of missing out, buyers, much like lemmings, react without much thought beyond the hope of striking it rich. This frenzy recalls the Klondike Gold Rush, and we all know how that story ended.
The issue here is not just the overuse of the term “Key Issue,” but rather the impact this has on the hobby as a whole. It distorts the market, creating artificial scarcity and inflating prices. Yet, few question this process, allowing it to continue unchecked.
So, where does it end? Is this trend even a problem worth addressing? I believe it is, and it’s time we take a closer look at the implications of labeling too many comics as Key Issues for the slightest of reasons.
As a devoted comic book enthusiast, I’ve been grappling with a concerning trend in our beloved hobby: the gradual exclusion of average collectors due to escalating prices and market manipulation. It’s not about the wealthy investors or newcomers drawn by investment opportunities – there are plenty of those. Instead, it’s about individuals like us who simply appreciate the artistry and narrative within comics, striving to assemble treasured collections.
The insightful words of YouTuber Uncanny Derek Comics resonate with me on this topic: “When the world’s leading comic book auction house and grader are motivated to sell high-grade books, particularly new 9.9 editions that fetch more than their 9.8 counterparts, it appears evident that hobbyists are being priced out to benefit investors and private equity firm shareholders.”
Is the Comic Book Market Ruined? I believe he presents a compelling argument. The inflated prices of comic books, artificially elevated by these practices, could be a bubble destined for an imminent burst. In the process, it seems to be driving more people away from the hobby than attracting new ones. While the number of self-proclaimed “collectors” may be on the rise, we should question who exactly is partaking in this activity.
To those who argue that “this is what the hobby has become” and that we must adapt to its current state, I would respond: If we created the hobby as it stands today, then we have the power to change it – but only if we choose to.
The persistent issue of defining a true comic collector continues to surface, and it seems everyone avoids addressing it. This subject sparks intense emotions across the board, making open dialogue challenging. The problem is that our modern era of comic collecting shuns any comments deemed negative or judgmental, leading me to view this superficial effort to present everything positively as nothing less than intentional disregard for the truth. It’s like Cinderella at 11:59pm insisting, “Everything is going great!” when the clock is about to strike midnight.
At the heart of it all lies a crucial question: Suppose the market collapsed and the worth of every comic vanished…would you continue collecting comics purely for your passion for their art, stories, nostalgia, texture, and scent? Or would you switch to another interest? I strongly believe that these are questions worth pondering over and discussing as they may help preserve the longevity of the comic-collecting hobby. In essence, the fixation on Key Issues could serve as an early warning sign, akin to a canary in a coal mine.
Read More
- Luna’s Paternity Bombshell Rocks The Bold and Beautiful
- When Will Captain America 4 Get Its Digital & Streaming Release Date?
- AR Rahman to earn a staggering Rs. 8 crores for Ram Charan’s upcoming sports drama RC16!
- The Batman 2’s Andy Serkis Gives Update on the Delayed Sequel
- Every Event Quest In Monster Hunter Wilds
- Lady Gaga Says Michael Polansky Inspired Her Song Blade of Grass
- Cliff Bleszinski shares design docs and concept art for canned Panic Garden game idea
- Constantine 2: Keanu Reeves-Led Sequel Is ‘Closer Than Ever’
- Manikandan’s Kudumbasthan Leaked Online: HD Quality Piracy Threatens Box Office Success!
- STETH/CAD
2025-03-19 19:16