1987 marvel universe by Comic Images

[44gwilson]

Has anyone actually figured out yet that these are the true ‘rookies’ for
Marvel superheroes? Comic Images released this first set in 1987 and then did a set for all the super villains called colossal conflicts in the same year. They are awesome cards and super hard to find, but with this whole marvel universe craze at the moment I figured it’s worth pointing out.

I know there’s the donruss cards from the 60s but those cards don’t actually include singular character cards like this set does. Then there was a foreign (I think Spanish or something) set in the 80s, but these comic images sets as far as I can tell were the first true character card appearances for all the avengers, x men and fantastic four heroes and villains.

[dd316]

A true rookie would be the first card, right? I would absolutely consider the 1960s cards "rookies" for these characters. But it seems like everybody's latching onto the 1990s releases because they're the cards they remember, and there are so many of them out there making them easier to obtain. Why spend more effort tracking down the older releases when the low hanging fruit is so much easier?

[BobCollects]

A true rookie would be the first card, right? I would absolutely consider the 1960s cards "rookies" for these characters.

Agreed. The first card is the first card. Do a lot of non-sports collectors use the term “rookie card”?

A quick eBay search reveals zero sealed boxes of Comic Images Marvel Universe Series 1 from 1987 sold in the past three or four months. If the boxes are already impossible to find, I doubt speculators will be able to go crazy pushing up prices.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[nowiamsad]

There’s also the 1975 Topps Marvel Comic Hereos cards.

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/06/c7/eb/06c7eb582ce7247586319768d597fafc.jpg

[webjon]

No. Non-sport collectors don't use the term 'rookie.' It doesn't make any sense in the context of entertainment cards.

[DynaEtch]

Im also in the camp that the term rookie does not have as much meaning in non-sports compared to sports.

1966 Donruss of course, but as mentioned it's not just one character on a card in typical format. This is considered the first card appearance for most purposes (of a limited number of characters).
Those 70s Topps were stickers, I guess some would consider those cards, some might not.

Philadelphia Gum Company released a set of sticker cards in 1967, several of which feature one character, most dont seem to know about those. It follows the same formula as those other early ones (the two mentioned above), of a blurb with some kind of quip remark. The marvel cards were all about the jokes back then.

While 1987 Comic Images Marvel Universe was earlier in the modern wave, it's also Comic Images, and the 90s marvel craze was all about Impel/Skybox/Fleer and those sets. People are attracted to 1990 Marvel Universe since it was the inaugural, major set. Besides the cool card art and design, 1990 MU also had the holograms to chase, something 1987 MU doesnt have (no real inserts in that set). With this being said, 1987 Marvel Universe probably deserves more attention than it's had at this point.

[dd316]

No. Non-sport collectors don't use the term 'rookie.' It doesn't make any sense in the context of entertainment cards.

It's just applying a sports term to non-sports. In the comics their first appearance is just that, "first appearance". What would you call their "first appearance" in card form?

[TimBuckTwo]

Would the tattoos with the super heroes be considered the RC?

[webjon]

It's just applying a sports term to non-sports. In the comics their first appearance is just that, "first appearance". What would you call their "first appearance" in card form?

First appearance makes a whole lot more sense.

[44gwilson]

Yeah, that’s what I meant to say - first appearance. I think a big part of the marvel boom is due to sports speculators getting involved with non sports cards anyway, so using their logic I think 1987 would be the truest ‘rookie’ or first appearance; first card set in English, stickers usually don’t get considered as much as cards, card designs are cool, full body character cards included, and even though it’s by comic images, once enough time passes that stops mattering. I agree 1990 is the set to collect, but I’m just saying down the line it’s usually the rarer sets that go for big bucks when it comes to first appearance.

[SupermanBrandon]

1st Marvel
1st Appearance
1st Rookie
1st EVERYTHING!

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210213/a3f3ba4951c3bdf87f159253893d2076.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jdandns]

Certainly, '66 Donruss is key, but there were plenty of characters first seen on the mid 70's Topps Marvel sticker sets created after 1966.
'87 Comic Images featured many more characters not yet invented in '76 when the final sticker set was issued, but beyond those four "flagship" Comic Images yearly sets, CI also released numerous artist and character sets (usually smaller 45 to 50 card sets) in the late 80's to the point that by the time the '90 Impel set was issued, most of the characters in it had already been featured on pack-issued, nationally issued cards or stickers (that being a common requirement for a widely accepted "rookie" card).

Better get 'em all, just to be safe.

[ToppsFB]

1990 actually titled sevrtal catds inthe set as "Rookies". Slways thought that felt weird but it is what it is. Specifically the Ghost Rider as a Rookie was odd because he had been in comics since the 70s.

[DynaEtch]

1990 actually titled sevrtal catds inthe set as "Rookies". Slways thought that felt weird but it is what it is. Specifically the Ghost Rider as a Rookie was odd because he had been in comics since the 70s.


Yea always thought this was odd. They are referencing the 1st appearance of Dan Ketch as Ghost Rider (the back of the card says first appearance Ghost Rider vol. 2 #1, 1990). This is a later and different incarnation than the 1970s Johnny Blaze version of Ghost Rider.

[astroshane]

I certainly see the point but the distinction is basically moot . Most if not all comic based collectors actually dislike the “ rookie “ label being thrown around . 1990 is going to be THE starting point . Some people are trying desperately to pump the 87 set on other group pages and it’s never going to work .

[DynaEtch]

I certainly see the point but the distinction is basically moot . Most if not all comic based collectors actually dislike the “ rookie “ label being thrown around . 1990 is going to be THE starting point . Some people are trying desperately to pump the 87 set on other group pages and it’s never going to work .


Agreed. The 1990 Impel set was much more important to the Marvel card hobby.

[alphaomegas]

Any set before impel is just awful looking and boring. They may get a few suckers to buy. I agree a lot of pumping everywhere going on people needs to be careful.

[44gwilson]

I certainly see the point but the distinction is basically moot . Most if not all comic based collectors actually dislike the “ rookie “ label being thrown around . 1990 is going to be THE starting point . Some people are trying desperately to pump the 87 set on other group pages and it’s never going to work .

In what groups is this set being pumped?

By simply applying sports logic to this non sports set, the 87 is a truer first appearance than 90 impel. As time goes on and prices go up, these cards will be the ones that pull the sub 100k price tags, if marvel cards ever reach that status.

[DynaEtch]

I still think the rookie thing is not a big deal in non-sports as much- first appearances were long ago in comics for most of these characters. The set is the more important factor, but who knows I could be proven wrong.

I was trying to think of a counterexample to that sports logic, and thought of one that is somewhat analogous to this situation. 1951 Bowman baseball is before 1952 Topps, yet everyone seems to prefer the 1952 Topps, and the Mantle fetches higher prices. After all , 1952 Topps seems to be that key, first major Topps set, with what many consider a superior design. Kind of like 1990 MU in the analogy. The analogy isn’t perfect for various reasons, one of which being the significant discrepancy in supply of 1990 MU compared to 1987 MU. Also it’s hard to say 1951 Bowman is analogous to 1987 Marvel Universe since 1951 Bowman is a largely collected major set in its own right. Maybe the better analogy would be 1987 Marvel universe analogous to 1951 Topps Red backs or something (although this is also an imperfect analogy for various reasons)- that earlier, but somewhat niche set doesn’t hold a candle to the major 1952 Topps set. No I’m not saying these Marvel sets are even in the same stratosphere as those historical baseball sets before anyone complains, I’m just using it as an analogy in the relative sense.

I do think the one thing 1987 MU has going for it is the significant less supply. However the set is the bigger factor in my eyes, and 1990 MU trumps it here.

[dd316]

Any set before impel is just awful looking and boring. They may get a few suckers to buy. I agree a lot of pumping everywhere going on people needs to be careful.
1948 Bowman Baseball looks awful and boring, doesn't diminish its importance.

When the 1990 Marvel set hits its peak, if interest is still there, people are absolutely going to jump onto other sets like 1987 or earlier.

[SupermanBrandon]

1948 Bowman Baseball looks awful and boring, doesn't diminish its importance.

When the 1990 Marvel set hits its peak, if interest is still there, people are absolutely going to jump onto other sets like 1987 or earlier.

Bingo. The 1990 set is currently very "easy". Easy to find. Easy to Rip. Easy to buy raw. Easy to send in bulk for grading. Give it time!

[jdandns]

The stickers that came one per pack in the Comic Images Marvel I II III & IV packs, unlike most of the cards, are actually pretty sharp looking, especially the series 1 stickers.

https://i.imgur.com/KB6jIeL.jpg?1
https://i.imgur.com/Jb1vMLQ.jpg?1
https://i.imgur.com/3FwN3b1.jpg?1

These are copyrighted 1986 which makes it appear they may have been produced in advance of the cards, which are copyrighted 1987.

The pack wrappers had an offer for a complete sticker set and comic-sized album for $18.95, free shipping.
That was somewhat pricey for the time, but a very good deal as it turned out.

This just happened for just the 7 Spideys in the set:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/1986-Marvel-Universe-SPIDERMAN-stickers-lot-of-5-30-34-black-Venom-emblem/254862941100

$83 for them, not too shabby.

[BobCollects]

A sealed box of Marvel Universe (Series 1) just sold on eBay for $1181. https://www.ebay.com/itm/383945328321


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[alphaomegas]

A sealed box of Marvel Universe (Series 1) just sold on eBay for $1181. https://www.ebay.com/itm/383945328321


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

hopefully it bring more cards and boxes out

[DynaEtch]

A sealed box of Marvel Universe (Series 1) just sold on eBay for $1181. https://www.ebay.com/itm/383945328321


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Unless I’m mistaken, this is not the Marvel Universe series 1 box, it appears to be a sticker box. However it is a very rare box to find in its own right.

I cannot find a single example of a 1987 Marvel Universe 1 box on eBay, either currently listed or under completed listings.

[44gwilson]

Unless I’m mistaken, this is not the Marvel Universe series 1 box, it appears to be a sticker box. However it is a very rare box to find in its own right.

I cannot find a single example of a 1987 Marvel Universe 1 box on eBay, either currently listed or under completed listings.

One sold for $500 roughly back in November I think, will have to check that, but other than that I haven’t seen anything of it. An iron man graded 8 went for $200 and a Spider-Man 9 for $450 both in January. Wonder what a sealed box would go for now with the 1990 prices.

[44gwilson]

There does however seem to have been a few boxes of set 2 called colossal conflicts going for about $5-550usd a box. This set covered all the villains first appearance, while set 1 covered the heroes.

[BobCollects]

Unless I’m mistaken, this is not the Marvel Universe series 1 box, it appears to be a sticker box. However it is a very rare box to find in its own right.

I cannot find a single example of a 1987 Marvel Universe 1 box on eBay, either currently listed or under completed listings.

You're right, it's a box of the stickers. I didn't realize they were sold separately.

I did find a Worthpoint listing for an actual box of the trading cards but I don't have a subscription so I can't see the price or date. Here it is:

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/1987-comic-images-marvel-universe-1923831152

[alphaomegas]

Unless I’m mistaken, this is not the Marvel Universe series 1 box, it appears to be a sticker box. However it is a very rare box to find in its own right.

I cannot find a single example of a 1987 Marvel Universe 1 box on eBay, either currently listed or under completed listings.

I believe it was error on box cover as it does shows series 1. Per checklist it Should have 4 cards and one sticker? that’s what the packs says.

[Fspook00]

I'm not saying I'm right at all, but I did make this post/picture for people to see why all the fuss with 1990MU.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CLCpWJVhZ8Q/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

[DynaEtch]

I believe it was error on box cover as it does shows series 1. Per checklist it Should have 4 cards and one sticker? that’s what the packs says.


I’m not an expert on the early comic images stuff, but I do know the 1987 MU series 1 box is an orangish box, which another poster linked just above.

This box appears to be only stickers, no trading cards (if I’m correct it says 10 stickers per pack, 50 packs per box). The stickers I imagine are the same ones found in series 1, but it’s not the cards. Whatever it is, it’s definitely pretty rare as I can’t recall seeing one before, and I’m not surprised it went for > 1K.

I'm not saying I'm right at all, but I did make this post/picture for people to see why all the fuss with 1990MU.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CLCpWJVhZ8Q/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

Good points here, and that’s an awesome design

[jdandns]

Here's an unusual find, a 1987 Comic Images prototype card of #1 X-Factor
This one is stamped Prototype on the back, but I think it's just a regular card.
Unfortunately, I don't have a regular one to compare it to.

Gotta love that CI used miscut cards with rough edges for the samples they sent out, since that's pretty much what you were going to get on the early sets.
Talk about truth in advertising.

https://i.imgur.com/fpUZhVU.jpghttps://i.imgur.com/P2M7HTC.jpg

[DynaEtch]

Awesome stuff- that's gotta be rare, never saw that prototype before. You're not kidding about CI miscuts :doh:

Pretty funny!

Edit: I used to have a 1987 Comic Images Marvel Universe set, and I'd say about 75% of the set was either off center or badly miscut.

[fabiani12333]

I know this was originally a pump thread from a year and half ago, but I want to respond to the OP's comments.

When it comes to rookie cards in sports, being a multiple-player card does not preclude it from being a rookie card -- just look at the iconic 1980 Topps basketball Bird/Erving/Magic rookie card as an example.

And when it comes to rookie cards, I don't think you can say a card is a rookie card when a character debuted in the comics decades before -- that's ridiculous.

[44gwilson]

Wasn't a pump thread. It's just a fact. There's a difference between a multiple player card and a card that's essentially just a glorified comic strip that looks mad goofy. 1990 is where all the pump and dump action has happened and makes no sense considering it's a fake rookie set that's ridiculously over produced. Also don't agree with last point, comics are an entirely different market and have nothing to do with the discussion.

[44gwilson]

Also pretty sure the market is already starting to agree with me. Enormous supply of 1990s boxes on eBay which sell for around $700. Last sales for sealed 87 box were $2200 and $2700 with 0 listed on eBay currently.

[jdandns]

Re-reading this thread, I'm surprised no one mentioned the 1984 FTC Marvel 1st Issue Covers. If you're looking for first appearances of comic characters on trading cards, that would definitely hold some, mainly the cover cards featuring characters through 1984 who hadn't appeared on the 60's Donruss cards or 70's Topps Stickers. I still have my own set (missing just one card, Silver Surfer #1), but I sold a full box of packs last year for $228.

[44gwilson]

Re-reading this thread, I'm surprised no one mentioned the 1984 FTC Marvel 1st Issue Covers. If you're looking for first appearances of comic characters on trading cards, that would definitely hold some, mainly the cover cards featuring characters through 1984 who hadn't appeared on the 60's Donruss cards or 70's Topps Stickers. I still have my own set (missing just one card, Silver Surfer #1), but I sold a full box of packs last year for $228.

they are cool cards, but do nothing to distinguish themselves from comics, which as I've said is its own market.

[glorbgorb]

Purely glorbgorb's personal opinion, but people who use the term "rookie card" are usually trying to conjure extra value to a base card to sell. Sort of the same people who advertise the first or last card in a print run as more unique than any other card in the same print run.

[jdandns]

I wouldn't call superhero cards rookies, either, but for whatever reason, people chase first cards from all kinds of real and fictional characters these days. Look at the Taylor Swift/Kanye card from "American Pie" or any number of WWF/WWE wrestler cards.

One unusual card in this regard is the "Hellboy" from the Freedonia Funnyworks 10th Anniversary set which was issued in May 1993. There is some debate, as a fanzine with him on the cover was released around the same time, but the card may well be the first appearance of the popular character anywhere (well before he appeared in multiple comic books and movies)

[44gwilson]

Purely glorbgorb's personal opinion, but people who use the term "rookie card" are usually trying to conjure extra value to a base card to sell. Sort of the same people who advertise the first or last card in a print run as more unique than any other card in the same print run.

First appearance/rookie/first card whatever you wanna call it, it's all the same thing. You trying to tell me first appearance comics are just comics then?

[glorbgorb]

First appearance/rookie/first card whatever you wanna call it, it's all the same thing. You trying to tell me first appearance comics are just comics then?

Of course not. The point is there are separate markets with some overlap in collectors. Much like with sports and non-sports. Sports has such an interest in it that Beckett came up with their rules for what constitutes a "rookie card" close to 40-years ago, and collectors abided by it. Remember XRC or FTC? There was a litany of acronyms because the collectors demanded it.

Using the term in non-sports is nothing more than sports people trying to impress their habits elsewhere. It's probably the same people who grade sketchcards.

[44gwilson]

Of course not. The point is there are separate markets with some overlap in collectors. Much like with sports and non-sports. Sports has such an interest in it that Beckett came up with their rules for what constitutes a "rookie card" close to 40-years ago, and collectors abided by it. Remember XRC or FTC? There was a litany of acronyms because the collectors demanded it.

Using the term in non-sports is nothing more than sports people trying to impress their habits elsewhere. It's probably the same people who grade sketchcards.

I hear this rhetoric repeated over and over by nonsports collectors and it just makes me think y'all are just upset that the hobby is getting more expensive.

Whether you like it or not, nonsports is seen as an investment now and not just some bargain bin trash cards where you can collect a whole master set for every release for $600.

The nonsports market of current is more like the sports market than it is like the non sports market of past. Even the manufacturers acknowledge that with their copy cat sets that replica hyped sports releases (pmgs, z force, etc etc).

Bottom line is no one needs to impress anything. It's already happened. It's too late. Big money has come and Nonsports isn't really it's own independent market anymore. Rookies will be important going forward and are a good investment.

[jdandns]

Those buyers of sports cards have certainly impressed their prices on non-sports cards.

When the trend for high-priced MSRP sports cards began, I remembered us non-sports guys mocking the prices of them when they were "only" $10 a pack.

The 3 non-sports sets that I can remember trying the higher quality but higher pricetags model that sports cards had fully embraced by the late 90's were 1995 Skybox Batman Master Series, 1996 Marvel Motion (all lenticular cards), and 1996 Marvel Masterpieces (the finale of the original line, highly collectible today).

None of those sold through at $4 MSRP a pack, and all were available on clearance for some time afterward (years, in the case of Batman and Motion). No more high-end was to be tried again for some time, these sales failures dove-tailing with the rough time non-sports were to have for a couple of years just then.

Of course, autograph and sketch cards would reinvigorate the market 10 years later, but certainly at a cost to the overall hobby. When breakers and worse, manufacturers, of non-sports cards started referring to certain insert cards as "hits", the writing was on the wall. It was the same mentality that made many sports cards prohibitively expensive right out of the gate. Here come the $500 boxes of non-sports was the thought then, and here they are.

I have no problem with that, the market decides, but I fondly remember a time in non-sports when the base set was what one was buying, in an era of sets from a wide swath of topics with the main attention paid to those "regular" cards. And because the sealed product had no instantly flippable cards in them, I could afford one of almost every box.

With the "hits" being such a motivator in non-sports now, today's base sets are often simple affairs, just a little more packaging around the money cards, really. This has resulted in a much narrower field of subjects (basically, those that have hits-possibilities) at a much higher price for non-sports than ever before. And even the ability to get one box of every new product (a costly proposition) doesn't mean you are actually getting a full set of cards.

The result is, I still love non-sports cards, but I'm no longer regularly adding new sets from a wide range of subjects to my collection and haven't been for around 7 or 8 years. It is what it is.

My thoughts on the early Comic Images cards:

I went to plenty of comic stores in Southern California in 1987 and 1988 and I don't remember seeing the first CI trading cards on sale at them, I likely would've bought at least a few packs. I've wondered if those first cards were better distributed closer to New Jersey, where CI was. Looking through some old comic book pre-order forms from the late 80's, I see I could've bought certain CI Marvel cards through the Westfield Comics service, but never did.

By the time I moved to where I live now, in 1990, a comic shop had a great supply of non-sports cards, so that's where my current collection really begins, in Marvel cards, certainly. (I'd collected cards as a kid, but let those cards go as an early teenager.), They had packs of the newly issued "Arthur Adams" set, and he was my favorite artist, so I bought loads of those, plus related artist sets, and some of the other older Marvel cards they still had in stock.
The store only had a few single cards from the initial 1987 Marvel Universe 1 set, although loads of the original one per pack bonus stickers, which is all I have to this day from that first set.
I got a nearly complete Marvel II Colossal Conflicts and Marvel III Wolverine Trivia there, inexpensively, but they had no Marvel IV Heroic Origins cards left at all. (I did get some bonus stickers from all four of these sets, by far the fewest from that final 4th set in the run. I would say packs of Series 1 and 4 would be significantly more valuable than packs of Series 2 and 3.)

Starting in 1990, Comic Images made Marvel cards simultaneously alongside Impel and eventually Fleer/Skybox even as that larger concern would take over the line in earnest by 1992/93. I always found it interesting that as fortunes for super-hero cards fell, by 1997 Fleer/Skybox issued the "X-Men 2099: Oasis" set as a joint venture with Comic Images, who kept on making miscellaneous cards for a nearly a full decade after Fleer/Skybox was finished with non-sports. In the end, Comic Images made non-sports sets regularly from 1987-2007, a 20+ year run, not too shabby...

[JeffG1954]

It's just applying a sports term to non-sports. In the comics their first appearance is just that, "first appearance". What would you call their "first appearance" in card form?

In baseball....usually "1st Bowman".

[PurplesaurusRex]

I'd rather have a first appearance comic over a "rookie" card that came out years later. IMO those have a better chance of holding value in the long run.

[DynaEtch]

Comic Images has been a mixed bag for me. For the Marvel sets, I just cant get into them. Most sets rehashed art. They did have cool looking prisms though. And they released a slew of fantasy art sets in the 90s if thats your thing. But Impel (later Fleer/Skybox) put out such a better product for Marvel, and it wasnt even close.

Re: rookie cards. As much as influencers and sports people try to pump the concept, I just dont think it'll catch on in the hobby as rookies have in sports, or first appearances have in comics.

One issue is the prior appearance in comics. But another is, in sports and comics, you have a steady stream of rookies/first appearance over the years. The way it works in Marvel cards though is you just have that first set with most of the characters, be it 66 Donruss, or 1987 Marvel Universe, and it's basically all the 'first' cards smashed into that set. Not all...for example Carnage didnt come until later, and new characters like Miles Morales were much later, but still, the vast amount of traditional Marvel superheroes just in that one or 2 sets- it's not as interesting. It also just seems really artificial to me to designate any of those the 'rookie' card. Maybe someone else sees added value there, but I personally dont, it's generally not the first appearance of the character.

It's probably the same people who grade sketchcards.

Im not a fan of grading in general, but this has to be the most ridiculous thing ever. I mean to each their own. But why does the condition of a sketch card even matter, as long as the image isnt obstructed? They're 1/1s and it's also art. Imagine if the Mona Lisa was graded BGS 8.5 (well the corners of the canvas are slightly dinged, also has some edge wear), sitting in some huge slab at the Louvre. how preposterous would that be. That's not the point of art.

[fabiani12333]

First appearance/rookie/first card whatever you wanna call it, it's all the same thing. You trying to tell me first appearance comics are just comics then?

Those are all different things. Rookie cards are sports trading cards that commemorate the first season of a professional athlete. First appearance is the first time a character debuts in a media -- comic book, movie, TV show etc. First card is just the first time a card of a character is produced -- nothing more.

[44gwilson]

Those are all different things. Rookie cards are sports trading cards that commemorate the first season of a professional athlete. First appearance is the first time a character debuts in a media -- comic book, movie, TV show etc. First card is just the first time a card of a character is produced -- nothing more.

I'm saying they are all different ways of describing the same thing - first appearance card, rookie card, first card, it really doesn't matter what you call it.

[44gwilson]

Those buyers of sports cards have certainly impressed their prices on non-sports cards.

When the trend for high-priced MSRP sports cards began, I remembered us non-sports guys mocking the prices of them when they were "only" $10 a pack.

The 3 non-sports sets that I can remember trying the higher quality but higher pricetags model that sports cards had fully embraced by the late 90's were 1995 Skybox Batman Master Series, 1996 Marvel Motion (all lenticular cards), and 1996 Marvel Masterpieces (the finale of the original line, highly collectible today).

None of those sold through at $4 MSRP a pack, and all were available on clearance for some time afterward (years, in the case of Batman and Motion). No more high-end was to be tried again for some time, these sales failures dove-tailing with the rough time non-sports were to have for a couple of years just then.

Of course, autograph and sketch cards would reinvigorate the market 10 years later, but certainly at a cost to the overall hobby. When breakers and worse, manufacturers, of non-sports cards started referring to certain insert cards as "hits", the writing was on the wall. It was the same mentality that made many sports cards prohibitively expensive right out of the gate. Here come the $500 boxes of non-sports was the thought then, and here they are.

I have no problem with that, the market decides, but I fondly remember a time in non-sports when the base set was what one was buying, in an era of sets from a wide swath of topics with the main attention paid to those "regular" cards. And because the sealed product had no instantly flippable cards in them, I could afford one of almost every box.

With the "hits" being such a motivator in non-sports now, today's base sets are often simple affairs, just a little more packaging around the money cards, really. This has resulted in a much narrower field of subjects (basically, those that have hits-possibilities) at a much higher price for non-sports than ever before. And even the ability to get one box of every new product (a costly proposition) doesn't mean you are actually getting a full set of cards.

The result is, I still love non-sports cards, but I'm no longer regularly adding new sets from a wide range of subjects to my collection and haven't been for around 7 or 8 years. It is what it is.

My thoughts on the early Comic Images cards:

I went to plenty of comic stores in Southern California in 1987 and 1988 and I don't remember seeing the first CI trading cards on sale at them, I likely would've bought at least a few packs. I've wondered if those first cards were better distributed closer to New Jersey, where CI was. Looking through some old comic book pre-order forms from the late 80's, I see I could've bought certain CI Marvel cards through the Westfield Comics service, but never did.

By the time I moved to where I live now, in 1990, a comic shop had a great supply of non-sports cards, so that's where my current collection really begins, in Marvel cards, certainly. (I'd collected cards as a kid, but let those cards go as an early teenager.), They had packs of the newly issued "Arthur Adams" set, and he was my favorite artist, so I bought loads of those, plus related artist sets, and some of the other older Marvel cards they still had in stock.
The store only had a few single cards from the initial 1987 Marvel Universe 1 set, although loads of the original one per pack bonus stickers, which is all I have to this day from that first set.
I got a nearly complete Marvel II Colossal Conflicts and Marvel III Wolverine Trivia there, inexpensively, but they had no Marvel IV Heroic Origins cards left at all. (I did get some bonus stickers from all four of these sets, by far the fewest from that final 4th set in the run. I would say packs of Series 1 and 4 would be significantly more valuable than packs of Series 2 and 3.)

Starting in 1990, Comic Images made Marvel cards simultaneously alongside Impel and eventually Fleer/Skybox even as that larger concern would take over the line in earnest by 1992/93. I always found it interesting that as fortunes for super-hero cards fell, by 1997 Fleer/Skybox issued the "X-Men 2099: Oasis" set as a joint venture with Comic Images, who kept on making miscellaneous cards for a nearly a full decade after Fleer/Skybox was finished with non-sports. In the end, Comic Images made non-sports sets regularly from 1987-2007, a 20+ year run, not too shabby...

really good post, thanks for this read

[44gwilson]

Comic Images has been a mixed bag for me. For the Marvel sets, I just cant get into them. Most sets rehashed art. They did have cool looking prisms though. And they released a slew of fantasy art sets in the 90s if thats your thing. But Impel (later Fleer/Skybox) put out such a better product for Marvel, and it wasnt even close.

Re: rookie cards. As much as influencers and sports people try to pump the concept, I just dont think it'll catch on in the hobby as rookies have in sports, or first appearances have in comics.

One issue is the prior appearance in comics. But another is, in sports and comics, you have a steady stream of rookies/first appearance over the years. The way it works in Marvel cards though is you just have that first set with most of the characters, be it 66 Donruss, or 1987 Marvel Universe, and it's basically all the 'first' cards smashed into that set. Not all...for example Carnage didnt come until later, and new characters like Miles Morales were much later, but still, the vast amount of traditional Marvel superheroes just in that one or 2 sets- it's not as interesting. It also just seems really artificial to me to designate any of those the 'rookie' card. Maybe someone else sees added value there, but I personally dont, it's generally not the first appearance of the character.



Im not a fan of grading in general, but this has to be the most ridiculous thing ever. I mean to each their own. But why does the condition of a sketch card even matter, as long as the image isnt obstructed? They're 1/1s and it's also art. Imagine if the Mona Lisa was graded BGS 8.5 (well the corners of the canvas are slightly dinged, also has some edge wear), sitting in some huge slab at the Louvre. how preposterous would that be. That's not the point of art.

I mostly agree with your point about the 'rookie' element being very different in sports in comparison. It does make it more of a question of which 'rookie set' is more important as opposed to having several rookie cards from different sets like you do in sports.

I just still disagree about comics having as much to do with cards as you say. I think first appearance comics will always be king when it comes to value, no doubt about that, but first appearance in cards will always have value, especially if the set is very limited like with donruss 66 or marvel universe 87.

My key argument in advocating for 87 is pop count. Realistically, that's what started this crazy money train. Getting PSA 10s from an important set with a ridiculously low pop count will always be something to chase. As of writing, there are 22 PSA 10s for 87 total, 170 PSA 10s for donruss 66 total, and 11766 PSA 10s for 1990 impel total.

Some of that could be down to what people are more likely submitting, but i also just think there truly aren't that many 87 cards out there, especially not in grading condition. I agree that comic images has put out pretty average releases for the most part and i agree that the condition of these cards is often pretty terrible with most either miscut or poorly centered, but i think that actually works in its favor when it comes to collectability with fewer PSA 10s possible.

Value wise this should place them in line with very low numbered cards, but i suppose time will tell.

One thing I can say for certain is that the 1990 impel are extremely overpriced for what they are and i agree that is mostly down to influencers pumping, but it is frustrating to hear them all call 1990 'rookie cards/first appearance cards/whatever' when there's so many cool sets that came before.

[fabiani12333]

I'm saying they are all different ways of describing the same thing - first appearance card, rookie card, first card, it really doesn't matter what you call it.

It does matter what you call them with regards to the trading card hobby because the phrase rookie card has a distinct meaning.

The trading card of an older Marvel character can't be a rookie card because the term rookie refers to the first season of an athlete. The Marvel equivalent would be first appearance in a comic book. But the 1987 Marvel cards depict characters that have existed for several years in the comics -- they are veterans.

It's best to stick to the first card designation when describing the 1987 Marvel cards. Using the phrase rookie card would be deceptive. First appearance would also be deceptive because the characters debuted in the comics.

[fabiani12333]

The main problem with the 1987 cards, aside from their relatively poor quality, is they feature artwork previously published. The artwork from the individual character cards came from the Marvel Handbook comics:
https://marvel.fandom.com/wiki/Official_Handbook_of_the_Marvel_Universe

The early 90s Impel cards featured original artwork. This distinguished them from the comic books and helped make them memorable and iconic.

Are the early 90s cards overpriced? Absolutely. Are the 1987 cards underappreciated? Sure. But don't call them rookies -- they depict veteran characters and don't feature original artwork.

[jdandns]

Most of the early Comic Images Marvel sets were terrible from a production standpoint, plus the unfortunate reusing of art which continued on even after the color/printing/cutting processes dramatically improved in the early 90's.

Probably the best looking of all the Marvel related CI stuff were the 1986 stickers which boast a truly classic look, the all-prism Silver Surfer set, and that late period X-Men 2099 set they coproduced with Fleer/Skybox, thanks mostly to the Hildebrandt Brothers art.

That said, Comics Images put out some great fantasy illustrator sets with almost all of them boasting autograph cards from the artists themselves including Boris Vallejo, Olivia, and Jim "Beyond Bizarre" Warren. Their chromium Conan The Barbarian sets were great, and towards the end they put out a fine Godzilla set that even featured sketch cards from the likes of Bob Eggleton. Their sets showcasing the vintage paintings of Frank Frazetta, Norman Rockwell, and Gil Elvgren all remain favorites of mine.

They also caught some lightning in a bottle by having the WWE wrestling license when The Rock was becoming famous, allowing them to release some of his first cards. They had a good run.