The rating is based on Detective Comics #359(November 29, 1966, 12¢), without any variation to disentangle - the assessment therefore depends entirely on the condition. The driving force behind the request is unusual: this file was re-evaluated by a readership which was not the original one, arrived in series from the years 2000 and 2010, and which then went back to around 1966.
Rating increases are generally explained by the screen or by criticism. There is a third driver, less commented on and slower: the renewal of the public itself.
This file offers the clearest illustration of this in the catalog, and this mechanism has practical consequences very different from the others.
When the audience changes, the rating follows
Let's pose the mechanism, because it differs from everything we usually read.
A screen adaptation brings in curious people, who quickly buy and leave. Critical praise attracts connoisseurs, in small numbers. A change in readership does something else: it permanently installs buyers who were not there before, and who stay.
This is what happened here. Series published in the 2000s and 2010s attracted an audience significantly different from that of traditional superhero comics to this character. These readers then did what all attached readers do: they traced the bibliography back to the origin.
Three consequences for the buyer.
Progress is slow but continuous. It does not trigger on an announcement and does not fall back after an exit. It follows the gradual arrival of new collectors.
She doesn't correct herself. An established audience does not leave. Unlike peaks of adaptation, there is no ebb to expect.
The signal to watch out for is editorial. A series that finds a new audience produces, five to ten years later, a demand for old issues. It's long, but it's predictable.
A file where everything depends on the state
An appreciable and rare point for a booklet from this period: there is only one edition.
No test prices, no foreign version, no reprints. The question “which one is it?” » is simply not relevant.
The price thus boils down to the material outfit of the object, and this considerably simplifies the estimation. Two sales of the same issue necessarily concern the same object, which makes the comparisons directly usable – a luxury on keys from the 1960s.
The corollary is that the note takes on decisive importance here. On a file where nothing else distinguishes two copies, each half-point weighs more than elsewhere.
Four defects dominate the issues from the end of 1966: the browning of the paper, the oxidation of the staples, the whitening of the spine fold, and the pages amputated from an advertising coupon. The first three can be checked on photos; the fourth requires explicit confirmation from the seller.
A nuance deserves to be made on this point. The absence of variants simplifies the estimate, but it does not make it trivial: the differences between grades remain considerable, and a copy described as "good condition" by a non-specialist seller can be placed well below what the market means by that. The vocabulary of general announcements has nothing to do with the rating scale.
This is particularly true for this booklet, often sold by people who did not constitute the collection from which it came — heirs, second-hand dealers, occasional sellers. Their good faith is not in question; their frame of reference, yes.
The namesake that distorts comparisons
A difficulty specific to this file deserves to be pointed out, because it corrupts the price benchmarks.
A character with an almost identical name, except for a hyphen, existed with the same publisher since the beginning of the 1960s. His debut constitutes a separate object, with its own and much lower rating.
Search engines and sales histories don't always tell the difference. An average calculated without sorting therefore mixes two unrelated fascicles, and the result describes neither one nor the other.
The solution is simple but requires rigor:discard any transaction where the title of the publication and the figure do not appear in black and white. Discard those that just have the name of the character, regardless of the price displayed.
This precaution also applies to sales. A precise ad, mentioning series and number, immediately stands out from the crowd and attracts informed buyers – who are also those who pay correctly.
A word on pace: on this issue, there is no hurry. The absence of peaks also means the absence of windows not to be missed, and the slow progression leaves plenty of time to compare offers.
The fragmented corpus
A particularity complicates the reading of this market: several people have carried this identity, and the original character himself occupied another role for years.
The result is a corpus divided into segments which are not valued in the same way.
Le founding segment, around the 1966 issue and the appearances that followed, concentrates most of the value.
THE modern series, numerous since the 2000s, are part of a reading market. Many entrust the costume to other heroines, which is confusing to those who don't know it: you can buy an entire series without finding the character you were looking for.
La period where the original character has another name forms a third set, poorly indexed because it does not appear under either of the two usual names. This is the most interesting segment to explore: little sought after, inexpensive, and yet central to the character's trajectory.
Practical advice: before buying a modern series, check Who wears the costume. The information is not always included in the advertisements.
A request that comes from elsewhere
An additional factor supports this case, and it is rarely considered.
This character was known to millions of people through television before being introduced through comics. An entire generation keeps a memory of it that owes nothing to comics, and some of these people return to the founding book decades later, out of nostalgia rather than out of interest in collecting.
This request has two useful features. She is insensitive to editorial fashions: a childhood memory never goes out of style. And it relates exclusively to the founding number, ignoring the rest of the corpus.
Practical consequence: the gap between this booklet and those that surround it is more marked than one would expect. The immediately following appearances, although of the same draw and the same team, remain significantly less expensive - because this public is not looking for them.
For a buyer, this is a clue: the reading value and the collection value are not in the same place on this file.
Let us add that this imbalance benefits patient buyers. Neighboring issues offer the same production context and creative team for a fraction of the price — that's where the material for a cohesive collection is found, rather than in the one piece everyone covets.
Certification
The reasoning is simpler here than elsewhere, precisely because of the absence of variants.
On files with several editions, a certified note serves both to identify the edition and to qualify the condition. This dual use disappears here: it only provides information on the condition.
It is therefore justified according to the classic rule – a copy clearly above average, intended to be kept for a long time or resold. Below that, the expense is not recovered.
One point, however, works in its favor on this specific issue: as nothing else distinguishes two copies, the note becomes the only selling point. A beautiful, uncertified copy finds itself drowned among ordinary copies, for lack of being able to prove its superiority.
Before committing, check the back fold yourself in grazing light and the condition of the four corners. They are the ones who mark the note, and the inspection is free.
What to watch out for
On an issue driven by the renewal of the readership, the useful signals are not those that we usually look for.
A series that lasts. A title renewed for several years has found its audience; this is the best indicator of a lasting expansion of the buyer base. A series stopped after twelve issues will produce nothing.
A presence outside the specialized circuit. When volumes end up in general bookstores or libraries, they reach people who never enter a comic book store. This is where the new collectors come from.
A renewal of your assumption. Series that reproduce what already exists build loyalty among existing readers; those which change register lead to others. Only the seconds shift the demand to the old numbers.
Conversely, two elements say nothing useful: sales of the first issue of a new series, inflated by speculative orders, and end-of-year rankings, which reflect the opinions of people already convinced.
How to estimate
Four steps.
Confirm the series and number. Detective Comics, issue 359, cover January 1967. This is what rules out the namesake.
Check the twelve cent fare. It dates the item and eliminates reposts.
Judge the state without indulgence. On a file without variants, this is the only criterion that remains.
Compare with identical note, on recent sales. The market is progressing slowly but steadily: an old transaction underestimates the current level.
OURstudy of the 1966 fasciclegoes into detail; ourrecommended seriescover the reading.
What we are asked about value
Detective Comics #359, went on sale November 29, 1966 for twelve cents. No variants exist for this issue, so the entire value rests on the condition of the example — a rare and comfortable situation on a key from the 1960s.
Because the driving force is neither the screen nor the criticism but the renewal of the readership. Series from the 2000s and 2010s attracted a significantly different audience to this character, who then traced the bibliography back to the origin. An established audience does not leave: there is therefore no ebb to expect.
Most often a mix between two characters. A namesake, except for a hyphen, has existed since the early 1960s, and its first appearance is worth significantly less. Only accept sales where the title of the publication and the number appear in black and white; leave aside those that are satisfied with the name.
With caution. This booklet is often transferred by people who did not constitute the collection from which it came — heirs, second-hand dealers, occasional sellers. Their good faith is not in question, but their benchmark has nothing to do with the rating scale: an announced “good condition” can be far below what the market means by it.
No, and many people are wrong. Several heroines have donned this costume, so much so that you can buy an entire series without finding the one you were looking for. Always check who is wearing the costume before buying: the information is not always included in the ads.
The period where the original character has another identity. This set is poorly indexed, since it does not appear under either of the two usual names: little sought after, inexpensive, and yet central in its trajectory. This is where we still find interesting things.
A series renewed for several years, a sign that it has found its audience. A presence outside the specialized circuit – general bookstore, library – which reaches people who never enter a comic book store. And an assumed renewal of your tone, because only series that change register bring in new readers. On the other hand, the sales of a first issue and the annual rankings say nothing.
According to the classic rule — a specimen clearly above average. However, one particularity works in its favor: as no variant exists, nothing else distinguishes two copies, and the note becomes the only selling point. A beautiful, uncertified copy drowns among the ordinary ones, unable to prove its superiority.
Follow the price of your Batgirl comics and your entire collection with My Comics Collection.
Discover the application