RICKYBOBBY

Never say never - was the under bidder on this piece. Just shocked what it resold for months later!!

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/dave-stevens-rocketeer-illustration-original-art-1990-/a/121804-14120.s?ic4=GalleryView-ShortDescription-071515

1 hour ago, heartened said:

Thanks, and please do keep track of sales and LMK if things seem to be changing on anything here.  In our list, we have Colan TOS and 2Up Iron Man at the 5-10K range.  I would imagine all the TOS pages are 2Up, but are there separate early-run IM pages that are 2Up?  Should these all be bumped up?  Howa bout Colan Cap?  Where does that go?

It would probably also make sense to have a Colan DD twice up vs regular size. Twice up DD pages should be in the 10-20k where the regular size should stay at the 5-10k. Couple twice up pages auctioned last year that went for 12.5 and 20k.

2 minutes ago, Unca Ben said:

SOLD!  Thank you!  It's a beautiful page.  

Absolutely agree. Plus it’s not like these are available at any rate. 

1 hour ago, Unca Ben said:

Xenozoic Tales #6 pg 7 "Green Air" 1988 -  Mark Schultz pencils and inks.  Image size 16¾" X 11¼".  
Remfro Flying with Zekes!  

Page is white and in great condition. The usual Mark Schultz awesomeness.  Very clean page.  Great use of Zipatone.  Whiteout used only for effect.

Published Xenozoic Tales pages don't come up too often.  Very detailed art by a master.

$2250 shipped (Continental US) FedEx Priority w/ sig. req. CONUS.  Buyer will pay for full insurance if desired.  Art will ship sandwiched between 2 pieces of masonite or in a sturdy FedEx poster/artwork box.
Outside Continental USA, contact me via PM first, as there will be additional shipping fees and Paypal fees for international transactions.
Personal check, Cashier's check or MO are welcome and preferred.
PayPal is great, no friends & family to circumvent fees. 

Buy it, make an offer via PM, or  seals the deal and trumps ongoing PM's.  Payment due within 7 days unless other arrangements have been made.
Thanks for looking! 

-sorry for the blurred image.  I'll take a nicer pic tomorrow when it's light.

14 minutes ago, bluechip said:

In other words, it isn't really difficult to do.  Which makes me all the more surprised whenever a potentially major piece with a big stat piece of the main character got photographed and meticulously authenticated and described and its image printed in a major auction house catalogue, the whole proverbial nine yards, without anyone ever holding it up to a lamp to see what's under the stat.

Heritage has a policy on stats. I had a piece I sent them with one panel stat with art underneath. They said regardless if there is art under - they still have to say it’s a stat. 
Not sure where the logic comes from but they said they can’t mention it even if there is art under. 🤷🏽‍♂️

Plus I wouldn’t consider Greg a source of reliable information. If you heard some of the stories like from Royer - you would know he’s a liar and just made up random things to feel important.

Not to pounce on the poor soul but it is what it is.

Actually - according to Mark Evanier - no one ever ghosted Kirby. He had people “help” him finish commissions when his health was ailing.

https://bleedingcool.com/comics/jack-kirby-stan-lee-idea-spider-man/
 

He was asked about rumors regarding Kirby's work on the 1980s toy tie-in Super Powers books from DC — was some of the art ghosted (i.e. done by other uncredited artists in Kirby's style)?

"That rumour is not true," Evanier responded, saying that later on when he was ailing, Kirby had people who "helped him out a little on commissions — Jack actually had less assistants than anybody else who produced that much work — but nobody was ghosting for him."

I used to own the JiM 83 which was inked by Ayers. Nothing wrong with the pieces but they are to “mechanical”. Take the FF 72 recreation for example which was commissioned by Glen Danzig which is 100% Kirby. They look similar to the Sotheby’s recreations but they still have that same feeling of “it’s just a copy”. 

https://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=509871

RB

I nice example would be Tales to Astonish 83. Gene Colan who was regularly doing the title was sick and Jack had to fill in for him. I believe he produced 22 pages in a single weekend.

1 hour ago, vodou said:

You must be quite young. 2001-2003...

Ahh thanks for that. You had said a few years back and thought you meant 2016 ish. I definitely was not doing any buying, converting or even watching the US dollar back in 2002. I was still in high schoool...

35 minutes ago, vodou said:

Roughly $1.60 is the peak from a few years back.

GBP making all-time records lows against USD this morning. That's hard pain for obligations borrowed in USD!

Nah I don’t remember it ever being 1.60. The peak I think was in 2016 around 1.45 (kinda where it’s at now). But I am in the same boat. Makes it difficult to buy at this rate but lovely to sell!

Got an interesting email from Heritage today. This snip from the email interested me the most - “Despite all obstacles, Heritage will strive to further widen the gap in Online convenience and service to our clients. We have taken in over $80 million in consignments and advanced or lent our clients over $30 million during the past 2 weeks, often with minimal advance notice. Just a few days ago, even as the financial panic escalated, our long-time primary lender (Wells Fargo) seamlessly increased our credit facility from $50 million to $75 million, so we have plenty of additional availability for cash advances to help our consignors in need of immediate funds.”

80 million in consignments ? Guessing not all art and comics but it seems that it’s beyond what they are used too.

Anyone else get this?

I am more curious about the piece of art the comic book is sitting on. 

 .. thanks for providing your nonsense free of charge .. it’s definitely entertaining.

14 minutes ago, Turtle said:

You seem to be going pretty far out of your way to dump on a piece that I own and enjoy and I'm not really sure why.  I'm not selling it.  If I were, you don't have to buy it. 

You're free to think whatever you want, but if you can't say anything nice...

Yup he sure is. And going far out there with no proof of anything. Just ramming is opinion down peoples throat and make fun of anyone who disagrees with him. What foolish behavior 

Great sleuthing skills.. you got me man.. you figured it all out 😮 🤷🏽‍♂️

11 hours ago, vodou said:

A different ID used that same sign-off a few years back..., and I'm glad you're getting your rest, but I hope you haven't broken Board rules by having two IDs

Oh and because you're my favorite Mitch-flipper (of Miller Sin City "grails"): ...just for you

A different ID used that same sign-off a few years back..., and I'm glad you're getting your rest, but I hope you haven't broken Board rules by having two IDs

That’s great someone else said “gnite” at the end of their message and you remembered this useless information.. And yeah needed the rest after reading all that nonsense. 
Appreciate you looking out for me - I’ll keep in mind not to have 2 IDs 😉
 

Oh and because you're my favorite Mitch-flipper (of Miller Sin City "grails"): ...just for you
 

  that’s a new one “ favorite Mitch-flipper of Sin City grails” - so you are also accusing me of being a flipper of sin city grails 

What other fantasies you got? 

7 hours ago, Blastaar said:

So in the case of the TMNT piece you have 3 artist signing off on it (Kirby, Eastman, Thibodeaux). Would be hard to imagine that he didn't work on it...right?

I talked to Thibodeaux specifically about this piece - firstly - Eastman didn’t draw anything on this piece. Vodou has no clue what he’s talking about (making things up as usual). Secondly, Thibodeaux penciled the monster but Mikey is all Kirby. There is 0 reason for Thibodeaux to lie about this as no one is trying to hide that his health was ailing and there is 0 monetary gain. 
Did Thibodeaux help make it look cleaner when he inked it? 
Absolutely

Gnite 

4 hours ago, vodou said:

This?

To be blunt...you're looking at a wonderful Thibodeaux/Eastman (on their respective characters) production here. Did Jack hold a pencil, push it around somewhere on a piece of paper making some marks? Sure, why not, my cat can do that too, but nobody would have bought either of them. It took the other two guys to make it look like anything worth owning. And that signature...might as well have used a stamp (copyright Thibodeaux?)...it's not Jack's and it's nothing Jack could do in 1992/93/94. Even a decade earlier things were getting...shaky.

Lol still going at it weeks later eh?! You seriously can’t get over with someone not agreeing with you ?

“Push around the pencil on a piece of paper and make marks”  - Vodou‘s excellent display of facts - as usual hahah 😂 .. 

“Its not Jack and nothing Jack could do in 92 93 94” - still waiting for facts to back up your statements loll

12 hours ago, vodou said:

According to some, Jack very best work was the same week he passed. YMMV

And you must be getting slow. Where did anyone saying he was drawing better in that other post? You said he couldn’t draw after 85- i proved you wrong and now your saying the conversation was about him drawing better later in life?

Get a life dude 

2 hours ago, vodou said:

Thank you, you proved every point I made in this entire thread with that one. At least that one is real.

For all, in case the image disappears on CAF at some point.

That's 1987 Jack in all his glory with a snazzy Roz Kirby signature to the right even...phantabulous

LOL.. nice try on the deflection there bud. I thought he couldn’t trace or draw a straight line at this time?
Signature is irrelevant when it shows clearly the man can draw - which was my point.

But listen - everyone is entitled to their OPINION. But doesn’t mean you have to sit here and try to convince everyone that what you are saying is true and discredit everyone that doesn’t agree with you. 

Anyways, don’t have all day and night to go in circles on this. I see where you stand and you know where I stand. Wake me up when there are facts to support what you say.

Gnite 

 

Since that was inked piece here is a PENCIL piece from 1987. Not sure what your definition is of not being able to trace or draw a straight line after mid 1980s. Your statements are completely false:

https://www.comicartfans.com/gallerypiece.asp?piece=721944

12 minutes ago, vodou said:

Sorry but the dude, all due respect, couldn't draw a straight line by then...traced or freehand. Sorry but it's pure fantasy you're peddling here.

Nope I completely disagree with you on that statement. If you were actually there maybe your words would have weight. I’ll choose to believe the historian here.

And here is one of his last pieces from the 90s just before he passed away. I talked to Mick and his experience with Jack so your statement above is complete fantasy.

https://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=553202

1 hour ago, vodou said:

Not true. Anybody with eyes that was there at the time (mid-80s on) knew what Jack's actual in-person convention drawings and signature looked like versus the "attributed" highly polished pieces/signatures from the same period and later (Sotheby's). The difference is so incredibly stark. The only way to explain it, the way you've decided to, is that Jack got much much better, after he stunk, as he got even older and up to even the hour of his death. Um...right  

FWIW I personally have no interest in ANY Jack Kirby art created beginning with Destroyer Duck and later. It just goes from bad to badder to worstest or...immaculate? ( )

None of this takes away from Jack the artist (in his prime) or the person, people get old, they aren't what they used to be. And so? The only blackmark is the secrecy being kept so that the Sotheby's-involved parties don't have any risk of liability there, and also for those that hold that hope to pass the stuff on as fast as possible and pass on themselves before it all falls apart and the transaction history is legally unwound.

Do you still have your mistake purchase? No. You sold it on too, praying that there was just one other open seat you could jump to in the musical chairs game that end of the hobby has become.

S I G H. (and you hope that piece never comes back and you have to reimburse the purchaser, right?)

Signing your signature for hundreds of people and doing sketches is much different then signing your name once on one piece . And how am I saying he got much much better? And how did he go from worse to immaculate? These are line for line recreations - you think he couldn’t light box at that time? With his health declining his process changed and had assistants help him - is that so far fetched ?

And yeah I’m sure people keeping quiet all this time to protect Sotheby’s from legal action ()

And not a mistake purchase - I just didn’t like Ayers inks on the piece. Or I would have kept my JIM piece. The piece is now in a well known Jack Kirby collectors collection now. Excellent for him. 
Your entitled to your opinion and you don’t like stuff from Jack after a certain period - then that’s cool. But you aren’t everyone.

1 hour ago, grapeape said:

I think what Theakston did was deplorable and I defended Kirby’s honor when the S hit the fan. Deplorable because he claimed to know who did what but refused to name names.

After the initial anger I began to consider the possibly of shenanigans. My conclusion is that Jack would never deliberately pull a hoax on anyone. It’s not who he was.

But....was the perfect storm of circumstances present between 1983-1983 that made shenanigans plausible?

I think Mark Evanier is a top notch guy. However objectivity from a writer may be expected if not required, is it possible that it was not necessarily applied? A lot of people were friends with Jack and wanted to help him. 
 

So, like Greg there are some who’ve been around long enough to connect a lot of dots. Who had access to Jack? Who worked with Jack? What was the physical observations concerning his ability to draw 1983-1993 ? Who would be motivated to help Jack?
 

There’s enough wonky there  to give pause. Greg’s motivations are what I questioned ultimately. As much as I dislike what he did and said many some items out there are presented as all Kirby have little or no Kirby art.

 

 

Agree with a lot of what you say here. Wonky to give pause but he put pencil to the page until his death. These pieces in question here aren’t sketch’s but line for line recreations. Is it really that hard to believe he could light box at that time? And had help on the stats? It’s not that unbelievable.

16 minutes ago, pemart1966 said:

That's a statement that needs a concrete definition for every commission that "Kirby" ever did.  Otherwise it's an airy fairy statement that means very little.  

Well Mark saying “no one ghosted for him” in front of hundreds of people at the comic con is far from airy fairy. Would anyone go in front of the same people and say they are fake but I don’t know who did them? Easy to type on a board where we are free to say anything we want with 0 repercussions.

40 minutes ago, grapeape said:

Some of us have been around this thing of ours a long time. Sometimes knowing something for certain and proving it (we are not in a courtroom) are two different things.

its easy to dismiss the advice on here. Just know that for the most part it is left here to make people think. It can seem snarky, know it all and darn right!!

I get it.

Still if I was anywhere near heartbreak(owning, buying, selling fake, stolen counterfeit or forged material) I’ll take that sobering message anyway I can get it.

Sometimes there’s a tendency to circle the wagons not facing the fact that we might be circling the drain.

And before I get blown up I’m not talking about Y O U.

Unless what I’m saying feels like I’m talking to you.

Here to learn and to help.

The Grape of Ape

Not just dismissing advice on here. But I don’t think anyone is certain of anything on here. People are just echoing what Greg Theakston came out and wrote this in his book - that Jack didn’t do those and someone ghosted - but I can’t tell you WHO. Okay.
To me - just seems like a great way to sell his book. Also, no “expert” on this board said anything before his statements (for about 18 years). And then all of a sudden they are fake because we all say so?
I would say in this case that someone like Mark would have a better insight in Jacks final years and his process during this time.