rotembk

2 minutes ago, Rick2you2 said:

Anything else you want to try and impress me with?

Not trying to impress you or anyone else for that matter, only to point out that your absolute determination of the lawfulness in question is at least lacking (the same way you dismissed the point I was raising). As Chris did a much better job than me in addressing the legal arguments I’m more than happy not to spend any more time on a mock trial. 

30 minutes ago, Rick2you2 said:

There seems to be two different issues which are mixed: bad behavior and unlawful behavior.

A contract is formed (in most cases) if there is an offer and an acceptance. Even if the buyer offered to buy but had not yet paid, or if the merchandise wasn’t shipped, will not change the fact that there is still a contract for sale. The buyer had the right to sell the right to the art created by the contract of sale.

Regarding what actually happened seems to be unclear or in dispute between people whose English is limited. But even if there were no contract formed, the question remains: what was the legal harm? If the seller received what he sought, and the buyer received what he sought, then the harm to the original seller is for failing to price the art high enough or in the right forums. That is not the buyer’s fault. 

In terms of bad business behavior, that’s a different issue as this thread exemplifies. No buyer (or seller) should rub the other party’s nose in his bad decision by doing what was done here. It gets them ostracised from their field. Better to pay, get the product, and wait a little while first.

Well, if we’re playing LA Law or “let’s answer a law school exam” there are at least several other questions that should be considered. For example, I expect most written commercial sale contracts would have some type of good title rep. If a seller only has a contractual right to take title/possession can they actually make such rep at the time of entering into the latter sale agreement? Now, what about a case like our neck of the woods where the use of actual written contract is pretty rate; might there be an implied good title rep? 

Another question is whether the original owner or final buyer can make an unjust enrichment claim against the buyer turned seller.

Finally, we’re lucky that at least one of the parties involved is from a continental law country, because now all of the above questions should be answered again taking into account the the duty to perform contracts in good faith.

And I bet a diligent law student can spot a couple of additional issues.

38 minutes ago, comix4fun said:

I was starting to doubt my gut reaction to how great that cover is. That image, that art team, those inks, the whole thing was haunting me it was so damn good. 

It nearly tripled in bid amount in the last 2 minutes, and every last penny is justified IMHO. 

Have to say that as someone that actually read the New Defenders I dislike that cover because it had nothing to do with the issue. Angel, Gargoyle and Valkyrie weren't even featured in the story. Feel cheated by it. Obviously at least two people felt very differently than me.

Just noticed what I think will be the highlight for many to watch the auction: Ralph McQuarrie original Star Wars concept art with X-Wing and Y-Wings galore, oh my:

https://fineart.ha.com/itm/illustration-art/ralph-angus-mcquarrie-american-1929-2012-y-wing-fighters-in-the-rebel-hangar-star-wars-movie-concept-art/p/5343-54001.s

Given estimate is $100,000-150,000.

3 hours ago, Bronty said:

It does beg the question what’s the most expensive piece of comic art from 1993 forward (the date of mtg starting), because I don’t think there’s a piece of comic art created from 93 to today that would be worth as much as the premier mtg piece(s).

What number are we actually talking about?

As for the highest value options since ‘93 that come to mind:

- Wolverine losing his adamantium in ‘93 (so either the interior page of Magneto doing the deed or the cover to Wolverine 75 ). 

- The cover to NYX 3 (2004) sold for $71,700 on HA sligfhtly more than a year ago; could be the underbidder would be willing to pay more today?

- Batman Adventures 12 came out in ‘93. In the wake of NYX 3 several people on this board claimed they’d pay ridiculous prices for the cover.

By happenstance, UXM 266, NM 98, Adjectiveless Spidey 1 and the like missed the train by just a couple of years.

3 hours ago, Bronty said:

Just my respectful opinion but that's all a load of hooey.    Her pieces get money for the same reason Shahrazad gets money.   For the same reason ditko spidey gets money and ditko charlton doesn't.   Its not about artistic talent.

If that brand new Nielsen was of a cow in a pasture would it have ended for 23k?

Like these?

9 minutes ago, BCarter27 said:

10% fees. How bad is that comparatively?

It's not difficult to setup an online auction site that is purpose-built.

Sure, sure, sure. Or just do what a couple of guys from the Facebook MtG Art Market group did, a 12 hour livestream from their home, auctioning art, cards and other MtG stuff to the people of their Twitch stream.

3 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

No need for any of that. People will be buying and selling fractional shares of the asset based upon the underlying value of the asset. It precludes having to liquidate it, which is the point.

I’m not sure if you’re serious in discussing the logistics at this point, but your suggestion works only if there’s a readiily available, sophisticated market. Factually, no such market currently exists. Or maybe you were thinking owners would auction their beneficial interests on HA or CL (or better yet, eBay!)?

19 minutes ago, Ironmandrd said:

Debbie Downer Note:  fractionalization or selling participations etc. raise securities law issues (ie, depending on how it is structured and intended to operate and rights of the participants, securities laws may need to be complied with.)

Also, keep in mind you’d probably have to raise roughly double the winning bid because the funds you’d raise would be subject to tax as ordinary income. Of course, you’d probably want to do all of this offshore to avoid the regulatory issues and also the tax issues. But it’s a fascinating mental exercise and if you can figure it all out there’re a lot of wealthy people out there who’d be happy to talk to you and make you rich and then you can buy that DPS all on your own without having to share it with anyone. 

(And to be clear, I responded to Darren just to keep the discussion orderly, nothing more than that.)

1 hour ago, BCarter27 said:

It's a valid question. I think because nostalgia is not really a factor in fine art (except for some upper illustration such as Rockwell and Wyeth and maaaaybe Warhol), financializing it is easier. I would say we COULD BE on the cusp (because of rising values) of this with high end OA and comics.

I wonder if fractionalizing large works could finally be a way to directly short not only the art market in general but particular artists. Or maybe I am misunderstanding how that could work. Anyone care to learn me?

I'd love to be able to short Bronze Age OA.

I reacted to Gene who asked about “a comic-con near you”. I agree it’s totally different when talking about collecting (you want to own the particular piece) and investing (you want the monetary appreciation).

I believe you can find private equity funds that invest exclusively in fine art portfolios already today.

Nothing prevents you from writing derivative contracts even today if you can find a willing counterparty (and if you have enough money you probably can). What you’re really asking about is having a public, readily accessible derivatives market. Others on this board are far more capable than me to answer that question, but I think that you need a sophisticated, public market for the primary commodity (the art) to develop first. The blockchain technology can facilitate that for sure, but blockchain technology is just a tool - a shinier, sexier, probably better tool - but still only a tool and we had similar tools for decades and we still don’t have such a market.

8 minutes ago, Rodey said:

WE should get 100 people to go in on a Liefeld page.

Query: Can the suggestion have legs to stand on when the page in question probably doesn’t?

20 hours ago, JesterSB said:

Final hammer price on Shaharazad $72K. 

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/kaja-foglio-magic-the-gathering-arabian-nights-shahrazad-card-painting-original-art-and-card-wizards-of-the-c-total-2-items-/a/121829-14061.s?ic4=GalleryView-ShortDescription-071515

Seems this didn't go unnoticed. Next Metropolis auction will have several MtG pieces (I'm guessing all were consigned by Spiderwebart Gallery which represents the relevant artists). http://www.comicartfans.com/gallerynew.asp?GCat=42486

11 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/06/08/arts/art-financialization-blockchain.html

Or, fractionalizing ownership of art through blockchain...might be coming to a comic-con near you!

You think collectors have evolved enough to the point where they can overcome the Bart-Martin-Milhouse Syndrome?

Trigger warning: Destruction of a #1 comic book issue. Not for the feint of heart.

For a while (several years ago at this point) he sold some of his art, including Flash Gordon and the DC HB line, through his website (he had a list of available pages and you had to email him). Then he let his website lapse but I just checked and he claims he’s working on setting up a bigcartel store to sell his remaining pages (see the Art Sales section https://www.docshanerart.com/). Doesn't seem like he has an art rep and I don't know about what he had/has available in con appearances. 

17 hours ago, NelsonAI said:

Now that Mysterio is confirmed as the new villain in the next Spidey movie, I would expect the ASM 311 cover to easily break 100K.  

Good luck to the consignor who is a fellow boardie. 

Cheers!

N.

 

On the other hand, we now know that Spider-Man himself won’t be in the movie because he died in Avengers: Infinity War. So the cover is now practically worthless.

As you can see here Joseph Melchior reps Gibbons. You can message him through CAF or the ‘contact’ page on his website. Good luck.

On 5/6/2018 at 12:45 PM, The Voord said:

http://www.null-entropy.com/2012/04/wally-wood1927-1981the-galaxy-illustrations-pt-2/

Scroll down the page.  Your illo *appears* to have been used for the August 1959 edition of GALAXY MAGAZINE.

Here's a similar one:

There’s a scan of the issue here, so you can see it was an illustration for the story License to Steal by Louis Newman.

40 minutes ago, comix4fun said:

And he's only taking six requests, so I think that's a good bet...although I think there are probably just as many fans of his X-men work. 

Would be funny to see someone spend that kind of coin and ask for Jim's take on a Keebler Elf or General Ursus from Planet of the Apes. 

Chris, let me use terminology you’ll understand: Jim is like the Supreme Court, he decides which commissions he’s willing to entertain. So the real question is “is the Supreme Court interested in hearing the People v. K. Elf et. al. or not”.       

So, I guess now the Rock is also bidding on HA? And kudos to Barry if I indeed heard him correctly making a miraclo reference.

Oh wish I was there in person to quip in with “well, technically speaking, Daredevil pages are made of trees”.

Simonson X-Factor page sold on eBay for $965 on March 19 this year.

Was then consigned to HA and sold in the May auction for $1,673 (inclusive of the BP).

Another "no skin in the game" chiming in: personally, I would've felt better with CL's decision if they responded more in real time and reopened the auctions last night after the other lots ended. Reopening the auctions 24 hours after the fact just seems to me to go beyond leveling the playing field. Obviously, the problem is that there's no perfect solution.

3 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

That assumes that someone would bid him up to $100K and risk getting stuck with a $99,000 Heritage bill if he has a change of heart.  It takes two to tango... 

Also, what one was willing to pay 3 years ago does not necessarily set a floor on what one would be willing to pay today!  

Sure, anything can happen (one might sprain their mouse-clicking-finger a second before the lot comes up for auction while being in a zero cell reception area), but he basically used you to announce to the world "I'm a buyer at $100,000; come at me, bro". And my sense from what I hear is that the guy can be taken at face value (or that's the perception within this community which, for these purposes, should have the same effect). Finally, the discussion these last several weeks clearly show there's more than one potential tango partner and they have enough time to digest this data point.

Maybe I'm just being dense, but how can anyone answer the question "how much it would sell for" (not "how much you think it's worth") with "less than $100,000" when you have a water dweller announce in another thread that he was willing to pay that price already three years ago? Assuming ours is a sufficiently sophisticated market factoring in all publicly available information, wouldn't $100,000 be the starting bid for all intents and purposes? Personally, I have no expertise (or interest) in the HQ OA market, I'm just curious about people's working assumptions in approaching this question.

17 minutes ago, Pete Marino said:

Yeah, it's really weird.  the whole RPG art market, there's almost no circulation of the art.  I find it really weird coming from comic art.  And I see that there is some demand for it, but it's not easy to track down.

But on the flip side, there are chances you can reach out to an artist and they'll have stuff stashed in their closet from 30 years ago.

Not TSR/D&D, but Jonn Zeleznik still has quite a bit of his original art; some of which he even listed on CAF. A lot of it is really a product of the time, but I still couldn't resist picking up the one that to me was THE sci-fi RPG cover even though I never played the game but always wanted to (picture of the published cover).