Rick2you2

Comic art tracker is one way. If you like furniture, try Chairish.

That statement of yours is basic economic theory, and generally accurate. But, some manufacturers deliberately keep their prices high to create an aura of value. It does work, because people sometimes assume a high price equals high value.

Not a total cultural reboot, a popularity reboot. I remember about 15 years ago when Art Deco furniture, which runs from 1925-1940 or so surged in pricing. This is when “brown” old furniture was flattening out. More recently, we have seen similar growth in 1970’s furniture. And, reboots of 1960’s clothing styles have come around, along with vintage pieces. In the 1980’s, the elegant fashions from the 1930’s made a reappearance. Popularity loves to mine old styles. People will look at this, and junky horror, too, as fun.

Exactly what I was thinking. Or, a home decorator could get it framed and use it in a family room or some other casual space. It’s just fun.

Any resolution yet?

I agree. I think it should stay open for at least 3-4 days.

I don't think in 20 years you will be seeing much of an OA market with buying and selling at the current high price level. Instead the market will hollow out with some stars, at the top, a dead middle, and most buying and selling at the lower end. Notice how General Motors kept Cadillac, Buick and Chevrolet, but killed the Pontiac and Oldsmobile? Same situation--the low priced stuff always has a market somewhere, and GM hoped the high end would, too. Similar situation in the market with department stores (prior to their most recent collapse. Look at which ones have gone out of business--remember Gimbels? You will notice I didn't mention the actual artist of the piece. For this kind of art, I don't think it matters as much as the scene itself. The scene stealer is the dialog, not the art. I love it.

I think you are undevaluing it for the future. It is a walking, talking exaggeration of 1970's pop culture, but unintentional. In my view, it has all the underlying appeal of a Roy Lichtenstein, without the color or the actual artist and a helluva lot cheaper. As someone who lived it, I think the piece is funny. Not all Romance art is in that category, by the way. When the 1970's enjoys a popularity reboot (like it did about 15 years ago), this will be appreciated when superhero's are considered stale.

You mean like John Buscema?

As I mentioned earlier, I suspect that some types of currently unfashionable art will one day be more collectible and desirable because they require no particular knowledge of the hobby to enjoy it. By way of example, this is a page which I spotted on Comic Art Tracker, and in my opinion, it is hoot. You can show the average person a Kirby fight scene, and they will probably consider it as no different than any other fight scene. This one, however, my gf really liked. Let me add that art with word balloons are likely to have more value than ones without them, all things being equal, because you can enjoy the content.

I felt that way when I got this page at an auction. As some of you undoubtedly know, the Phantom Stranger has been my favorite character for decades. When the second series was being published, I was always hoping he would get a "personal" life of some sort. So, when Len Wein introduced Cassandra Craft, I was thrilled. Then when this issue came out, and I saw the last page, what can I say? Naturally, I was going to get it when it showed up at auction.

Thank you for stepping up. What about Adams? Old masters like Eisner?

Make some guesses. Then maybe we can look back and see how you did.

Since there seem to be a lot of opinions on what's going to happen, take a guess at the longer range.

I will.

In light of the ongoing debate on the Forbes thread, would anyone like to commit themselves in print as to how different segments of the market may rise and fall over the next 25 years? More specifically, how about at 5 year, 10 year, 20 and/or 25 year intervals? Since this is my idea, I may as well go first. I hope I don't end up eating my words. In 5 years, run of the mill 1970's work will show an actual decline, as it seems to now be doing. Same with 1960's work, except for important artists or key characters. But, kitchy stuff from the 1950's to 1970's will show a small resurgence--the sillier the better (in particular, romance or crummy horror). The trend will continue, with books from the 1960's to the 1980's peaking in about 15 years (prices may not drop, but sales will). In the next 20-25 years, the trend expands to cover the 1990's and 2000's. By the year 2040, this hobby starts falling in on itself in terms of pricing.

Close. Just put in the $900 bid on a piece with FMV 1000. That would make a casually interest person think twice about being forced to bid at $925 just to track.

Not sure how valid it is to just hold "the best of the best". There are a lot of owners of rare Beanie Babies who can't unload them at anything resembling market value. And while it hasn't dipped as badly, antique furniture of significant provenance isn't doing so hot either.

Don’t forget, you can’t take it with you. Instead of thinking about the artwork’s “value”, enjoy it as a reflection of your past, maybe your present, and a source of future enjoyment. The kids will make their own memories. These are yours.

Two of my pick-ups from last week's NJ Comicfest by Tom Mandrake. I really love his work.

True, it would be to discourage trackers who might not otherwise remember to bid. Minor idea, maybe I'll skip it.

1. It looks like there was a list price and you were making an offer to pay less. I interpret the silence as a rejection. Sometimes artists want more than the market will bear, and eventually change their mind to make a sale. Other times, someone buys it. I suggest that if you really want it, you may have to spend more than market price. It happens. 2. If it is really great, don’t complain too loudly. You could have gotten 2 lousy full figures. As to the value of what you say is overpriced work, same comment as above. Finally, I know you said you paid for 2 full figures, but what do you have in writing to support it if that statement is challenged? There could have been a misunderstanding. 3. You are right, but s**t happens.

Let me suggest, respectfully, that if you want it and they come back at anything other than $4,500, you say no. You were probably given a quote at what MGA thought they could sell it for, and that MGA must confirm it can be sold for that price. MGA should have told you that up front. Legally, you would be correct, there is an offer and acceptance, so there would be a contract for the price, but that's not going to do you much good in the real world. You do have a right to be pissed off; I would be, too.

Good point.

There certainly is. But what I was thinking about is bidding about 25-40% below what I felt the market should be, and thereby place the risk on casual watchers if they wanted to potentially get something they weren't that crazy with a low bid just for the privilege of watching.