drdroom

If the consignor wants to win the auction then why'd he put it in the auction in the first place? That doesn't pass the smell test. OBVIOUSLY a consignor bid functions as a secret reserve.

Well, as it stands, and despite the public declaration of a Heritage representative, Heritage allows shilling, Comiclink doesn't. For me, that's a big plus for Comiclink.

...anyone? ...hello?

I don't know whether it's been noted before or not, but Comiclink's terms and condition has a phrase similar to Heritage's, but with one big diference:

 

Regardless of the disclosure of his identity, any bid by a consignor or his agent on a lot consigned by him is deemed not to be made in “Good Faith.” Emphasis added.

You think the HA article 15 just has a typo?

Dear Heritage, a valid question has arisen which you might have missed amidst much japery:

Stewart Huckaby came on the boards and said unequivocally:

"Heritage absolutely does not allow consignors to bid on their own lots."

And yet your Terms and Conditions, Article 15, seems to say that consignor bids are perfectly fine:

"Regardless of the disclosure of his identity, any bid by a consignor or his agent on a lot consigned by him is deemed to be made in “Good Faith.”

I imagine all parties would like to have this clarified!

Who doesn't know that Heritage allows consigners to bid on their own items?

 

Apparently, this guy:

 

http://boards.collectors-society.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Board=48&Number=9112945&Searchpage=1&Main=398822&Words=+swhuck&topic=0&Search=true#Post9112945

 

Heritage absolutely does not allow consignors to bid on their own lots.

 

Sincerely,

 

Stewart Huckaby

mailto:stewarth@ha.com

------------------------------------------

Heritage Auctions

3500 Maple Avenue, 17th Floor

Dallas, Texas 75219-3941

Phone: 1-800-872-6467, x1355

coins.ha.com

 

 

 

Versus: "Regardless of the disclosure of his identity, any bid

by a consignor or his agent on a lot consigned by him is deemed to be made in “Good Faith.”

Do you think maybe it is time for Heritage to grace us with another of their valuable clarifications?

Since Mastro is a hot topic, bumping this thread from 10 years ago.

 

Looks like some of it got scrubbed at some point. I made a post toward the end where I said the seller should have had Romitaman sell the art, rather than Mastronet, since he ended up doing so much better with it. Which prompted a sharp rebuke from a Mastro rep. But hard for him to argue when it looked like Burkey was able to flip all those pages for 2X almost immediately following the auction.

 

That exchange no longer exists in this thread, for whatever reason. It may have been a separate thread, but pretty sure it was this one.

 

Anyway, I remember this because as I was still relatively new to the boards, it was interesting to see how much these threads may have been monitored by influential lurkers (and apparently, that's still the case). In digging up this thread, I was hoping to see who that Mastro rep was..."Chris Porter", who's named in the press release in the beginning, rings a bell. Was hoping it was Doug Allen, or one of the other big names, but Mastronet's presence on the boards appears to have been erased. Damn!

 

Thanks Nexus for recalling this stuff from before my time. These threads have been an eye-opener, although some people seem to be trying to clog them up with repetitious nonsense.

Second the Fischler & Cochran suggestions! (& Donnelleys, of course!)

I'm a little hesitant to weigh in with this opinion, in case Simon is listening, but oh well. To me, his current work does not bear comparison to the prime period illustrated in the initial posts. As an artist myself (not comics), I'm sort of fascinated with (and terrified by) incidences of what appears to be drastic decline in an artist's gift. Not the more common gradual loss of freshness that we see in lots of artists as they keep grinding out the same sort of pictures on unrelenting deadlines, but the few cases in which it just seems like a gift has been taken away, almost overnight. Bernie Wrightson has been much discussed and himself has, at least to some extent, acknowledged the tragedy, which is what it is. In the contemporary art realm, Masami Teraoka is an artist who appears to have "lost his hand", producing work with the same formal ambition but a complete loss of the pleasure of elegant drawing. It seems to me a rare but real and terrible circumstance.

No one is answering my query about the Bruce Timm market. I'm not trying to be snarky at all, I think Timm is talented. But based on this result, 8300. for an average looking panel page it seems like he's hotter than Kirby or Toth. Is Batman Adventures an important book now?

Open Letter to Boris Vallejo:

 

Please immediately destroy all your "private" naughty art. We do not need to see it while you`re living or after you pass away. Seeing Fraz's was bad enough.It makes my eyes bleed.

 

Signed: A Semi-Fan of Good Art

FTFY

 

So over the top

 

He's done many pieces any illustrator would be proud of. And some cringeworthy ones like daredevil, there's no doubt.

I've decided that the Daredevil is my favorite Boris piece.

Bruce Timm half-stat Batman Adventure pages go for what, now?!?

 

 

So did someone not read the description very closely before bidding?

Ok, actually never mind the stats issue, my real question is basically why is any Timm panel page more than, like, a thousand or so?

Bruce Timm half-stat Batman Adventure pages go for what, now?!?

Journey into Mystery #122 - $155,350.00

 

Great team of Kirby and Wood. Anyone surprised on the results?

 

that is 17.2% growth from 2003 sale

That seems like a notable lag behind lower level Kirby pages, most of which have at least doubled since 2003, no?

Piracy 6 cover at 11K must be the steepest price-to-greatness ratio for EC covers. It was all in the color work!

Healthy result on Barks Trick or Treat page! 43K

Great deal for someone on the Amazing Adventures 7 page.

But is Heritage claiming them to be the same painting? As I read the description they are claiming the one they have is a formerly undocumented prelim. Naturally it would have differences.

Seriously! I'm struggling to think of a comparably important piece that's been auctioned in the last few years... anyone?

 

ASM #121?

Hmm. Yeah, that's pretty close, I guess, though for me it's no contest given the superior artistic quality of the Adams cover and the sort of official-reboot-of GA (already started in B&B, but now in his own series), plus this book is kind of the beginning of the Bronze age the way Showcase 4 began the Silver.

Seriously! I'm struggling to think of a comparably important piece that's been auctioned in the last few years... anyone?

Guess its time to rotate the exhibit...

Seems pretty clear that Buscema drew a cover very close to this, but with the Vision's face a bit more obscured by the other figures. This was statted, and the small figures separated from Vision's face and lowered about an inch. The seller's claim that Buscema drew the new jawline and other minimal fixes is pure wishful supposition.

If the new owner sells it in ten years for double, is he still nuts?

Comics General Takes a Shot at Debating Roy Lichtenstein

Kind of tough to get into that one, Gene. Everyone you're debating with I already have on ignore.

 

:roflmao:

 

Wait, I'm in there!!

I shot my wad on the last Lichtenstein thread, screw it. Maybe this is what the internet is for: to just blast out all the arguments we used to keep in our head until one day we went postal, & everyone said "Gee, he seemed like a nice guy. Kept to himself a lot..."

Look here's a few rules of thumb

 

1) actual Bob Kane art, while it can be found, is rare

when you see actual Kane art, it definitely has it's own characteristics and doesn't look like art drawn by any of his ghosts

2) most original Kane pieces are small sketches and when I talk sketch, a sketch is a pencil sketch or a writing pen sketch.

3) most good "Bob Kane" signed finished pieces of the era prior to the middle 60's are Sheldon Moldoff and they are done in a style closer to Bob's style than Sheldon's own style.

4) finished Bob Kane pieces are rare enough as to be non-existent

5) after Moldoff, Kane used any number of artists at different times to do different work.

Hired to sign their art "Bob Kane" these people are ghost artists

Greg Theakston did some ghost work for Kane.

 

and finally

6) if you met Kane and said "Hey, I would love to have a really nice piece of art done by you for my small son. How can I contact you about that and get something".. well you could indeed get a piece of art signed Bob Kane, however.. what price do you think you would have to pay?

Hint: It would not be in the hundreds of dollars

as a matter of fact, getting a piece of art from Bob was no inexpensive task and he was more than happy to say "Yes, I'll be happy to do it fo ryou. The price is $5000" and then he would call up a ghost artist, pay them $500 and pocket $4500.

so if someone is selling a piece such as the one that started this thread and it wasn't some expensive piece - alarm bells should be ringing

 

in my opinion, the piece this thread started is not even by a ghost artist, but by someone creating a piece of art to sell it and "faking" it as a Batman piece by Bob Kane

 

you want an authentic piece by Kane.. Watch Heritage, contact Albert, Mitch, Mike, Anthony or even Steve and Rick and you will be at least guaranteed it is an authentic ghosted Bob Kane. Anything else is to be avoided unless any respected dealer can say "oh yeah, I sold that piece to that guy".

 

Thanks! Good info. Glad I'm not looking for a Kane!