Rick2you2

He didn’t have to a rush job. Just a sketch.

Welcome aboard. I’ve bought art, on and off, for over 40 years. I was “off” when married. Caveat emptor, but I definitely got the better of the deal. I also specialize in one character and love comparing styles. For me, half the fun (and frustration) is finding something worth buying. First, DO NOT neglect your IRA or 401(k) for this stuff. That may seem like a silly warning, but if you really get into it, buying stuff becomes like eating potato chips. Second, if you are not familiar with Comic Art Tracker (CAT) sign up. Almost everything on-line, except Comiclink art auctions, which shows up on line is on CAT. Be very careful with eBay. Fake art of popular artists is disturbingly common. Bruce Timm, Peanuts, and Jack Kirby are some of the more common fake subjects or artists. Regarding quality over quantity, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and in this hobby, price is not proportionately related to beauty. Prices are often a function of nostalgia and popularity, of the character, artist and storyline. So long as a piece is published by the Big Two, however, it has a guaranteed level of quality. So, I would stick to that for now (at least). Just flip through CAT and look for stuff. If I were you, I would not buy “artists proofs” or digital art. It has little resale value, since they are really just prints. But, I love modern and happily add it.

He told you his basic rate was $500, but you offered only $200. He also told you it was Friday night and he needed beer money. Hanging with the boys (and girls) can be just as important as rent for social beings. So, from some perspectives, you dangled a lowball offer, and then gave him a way out. Incidentally, I almost never get commissions from artists unless they can do it at the show (or I know them or can get them vouched for by someone I trust). Too many bad stories.

Not dying before it’s complete.

Look at the bright side: they have real worth.

And he got a nice beer night. He didn’t have to do a crummy job to do a simple one. But more pointedly, you were not offering anything close to his market rate. That is an invitation to trouble; if he had done it, you would have gotten something that was around 40% of what he would normally put in (unless you were an old friend). It sounded like you were trying to take advantage of him due to his situation. As I said, I probably would have asked for just a quick sketch which he thought was worth $200, and see what he would do. Then, he may have surprised you.

To be honest, you should not have made an offer like that. It virtually guaranteed a problem, unless he was a saint. The guy just needed beer money. You probably should have said that you would pay $200 for whatever he could do then and there. Since no one else was around, he was under no pressure by them. If he couldn’t do it, walk away.

They look like copies which the inker inked over.

So, I should buy all of their stuff, even at 100% over market, because in a few years, I will be rich? Funny, I never thought of them as humanitarians. I guess that’s also the reason they sometimes like to improve their art with fake cover logo’s and the like before selling them. Just acts of kindness by really special people.

And yet, they remain in business.

I think you ought to be a bit more temperate about this stuff. First, OA is not a unified market: it does not all go up, at least not by leaps and bounds. There are lots of pieces the market has deem “eh”, and they just sit around forever, unsold. The “classic” art market also has its duds, and some of that stuff actually does go down. Second, this is a hobby that is a lot of fun when you know the difference between major pieces, and artists, or the other things which makes it fun, but most people don’t and really don’t see much physical difference. That automatically means “limited buyers’ market”, which effectively caps price growth. Do people all know the difference between a good and bad Picasso? No, but there are enough people who do that they will generally be priced accordingly. And let’s not forget the “hot” artists in all areas of art, who burn as bright as a Banksy, but then flame out. As much as I hate to disappoint you, I guarantee that you (or I) are going to miss a lot of swings. Finally, we also have the aging factor: high prices based on nostalgia more than quality. Bottom line: I wouldn’t be all in on this stuff, but treat it as a highly speculative investment when you get into the nitty-gritty.

I wouldn’t define it as necessarily story or art based at all. For example, the first published piece by Neal Adams is historic because of his outsized import in artwork. The first modern comic without a CCA seal is historic (and in that case, valuable). The marriage of Superman and Lois Lane is historic, but only because of the characters’ outsized importance in comics. The last appearance of the original Captain Marvel is historic. The first appearance of a black person on a Big Two comic cover would be historic. The first true Graphic Novel? Yes. A homosexual kiss on the cover of a comic would be historic. The first appearance of the Phantom Stranger? Nah. Most storylines? Nope.

They do have a potato chip quality about them… 💲

I think I can get a twofer on straight jackets.

Just inks? Wow.

Rather than claiming victory, and potentially stirring up a hornet's nest, why not email him and suggest the debate be private? Honestly, I'm not interested in winners and losers. Give Mike the night off.

How about we skip the whole subject on the board, and just let you 2 email each other instead?

And the person’s name is?

When did this become the pissant thread?

You missed a bit: 🗑

That is actually right on the money. The anonymous pseudonym he used there was Silence Dogwood. Can’t tell from the image, but maybe that was part of the thought balloon which was lost. “And now, back to our regularly scheduled programming…”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Did Benjamin Franklin write under a pseudonym? Silence Dogood was the name Franklin used to write the letters. In the 18th century many people wrote using pseudonyms (fake names used in writing). Franklin made up a whole character who went by the name Silence Dogood and wrote the letters as though he were she." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Race's attacks were uncalled for, but the problem is the content. The fact that he was cowardly, and apparently willing to admit it, doesn't really mean he would be held accountable for them. No duelling allowed; no lawsuits likely. Shunning in conventions? Eh. This is not a defense of his conduct, mind you, just a focusing on the key issue--bad content.

This really doesn’t surprise me. I think it’s somewhat reflected in the auction prices we are seeing on lower category stuff (which is probably the meat and potatoes of most dealers). And yet, some prices still stick high.

I’ll probably skip NY this year. Too much junk, and I am trying to stay away from commissions.

I never particularly minded when he engaged in bullying except when it veered into name calling or needless snottiness (since when does attaining the age of 66 mean someone knows how to write?). He did have valid comments, even if they were sometimes roughly phrased, and that gave them value. And no, I am not referring to a price critique of something offered for sale that should never have been placed in Marketplace and was deservedly removed. But, this is also not a board populated by delicate flowers: here you will find lots of brainpower; an apparent ability to handle the tougher parts of the business world like price manipulation, and a bit of money. He dished it out but he got it back. What does bother me, however, is that his comments sometimes caused a subject to devolve. For those of you who radically disagree, I get it. In my view, a little charity goes a long way to moving on.