Rick2you2

On 2/3/2024 at 5:13 PM, ThothAmon said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/30/arts/sothebys-art-fraud-trial.html
Nada nyet bubkus. 

I read a few write-ups about this, and there was a lot more going on here. First, the buyer and his representative had reached a settlement previously, leaving only Sotheby’s as a defendant. Second, the “agent” was apparently getting paid 2% by the billionaire for what he found. In this country, selling a piece and getting a commission for finding it would sound like a violation of an agent’s duties to its principal not to engage in self-dealing. It also says something about a poorly designed contract for remuneration of the procurer who had a positive incentive to cheat. So, while Sotheby’s may not have been proven guilty (as compared to what Sotheby’s may have done), the liability of the procurer sounds pretty obvious—at least if US law were applied.  

On 1/26/2024 at 6:08 PM, ThothAmon said:

You could probably sell it on eBay as a Jack Kirby original.

On 1/26/2024 at 3:42 AM, The Voord said:

Yeah, I could never get into Kirby's Fourth World stuff!  I did follow Kamandi and The Demon, which I enjoyed.  Kamandi was undoubtedly Kirby's take on the Planet of the Apes phenomenon, but as I was a big fan of the original (first two) movies, lapped that stuff up, lol!

In the 1960s, Stan Lee's dialog definitely helped.  If you can liken it to music, Lee was a good lyricist to the music being composed by his artistic collaborators.

All I could read was Mr. Miracle. 

On 1/22/2024 at 10:02 AM, Noodlez said:

 

Keep . . . kids away from your or you'll learn the hard way  eventually. 

 

Particularly the ones who have a box of Crayolas.

On 1/20/2024 at 8:15 PM, Rick2you2 said:

most of my top 10 most viewed fall under the categories of non-Marvel, sketches, or unpublished.

Nah, just curious what caught people's eyes.

I actually like Benes' work.

On 1/20/2024 at 4:21 PM, John E. said:

Yup. For all the veneration of Marvel, covers, and published, most of my top 10 most viewed fall under the categories of non-Marvel, sketches, or unpublished. And forget about price.

Ed Benes drawings and Chris McJunkin sketch cards?

On 1/19/2024 at 6:43 PM, Dr. Balls said:

This is always my concern when dealers say "I think it's published" or "might have been published" or they just have some generic statement talking about a book but not a specific issue. I like having the hard copy - especially because I collect art from some not-very-popular 90's books. I've gambled on many pieces, found the published proof in physical books that weren't available digitally, and got busted on a few that were sold as "published" but were not. And depending on if the art is at auction - I may not have enough time to track down a printed copy and have to gamble on it.

For years, I have tried to get a hard copy of a fanzine for which I have the cover and that I know was published—right down to the original publisher. I even have his identity as he has mentioned the possibility of doing a reprint. No luck.

On 1/15/2024 at 1:40 PM, Kryptic1 said:

That’s impossible!  You can clearly see the MSRP is $2,000.

Of course it is. He did advertise it as “manufacturer’s” suggested retail price.

On 1/14/2024 at 2:51 PM, Bronty said:

That’s good information but I was just responding to the idea that “well he can afford a lawyer so he should just draw it up to his advantage, which is ridiculous on its face.   
 

It also doesn’t really answer the question of whether or not Bouvier was in fact an agent here.    

That’s for a jury/fact-finder. We don’t have enough facts. Probably, the most important factor is whether he thought he was buying a product, or buying assistance in locating a product.

You really want a challenge? Here you go. 

Arthur Ranson from "Batman and the Phantom Stranger" graphic novel.

This is what I call a "fake" panel page. The central and secondary graveyard sculptures, as well as the background, are all positioned in a way to continue into all three panel pages, like a splash page but with panel separations. Yet there are also three different figures of the Phantom Stranger at different locations. So, it may be that the same character is in 3 different places at the same time--or is he simply moving around the same place at 3 different times? Throw in the quality of the line work, and the lovely way it drips off the page. That should keep you busy.

On 1/13/2024 at 10:42 PM, Bronty said:

You know, both parties have to sign a contract.    Just because you draw up a contract you like and bring it to me doesn't mean I won't tape it to a urinal and use it for target practice.

Actually, they don’t have to sign it all to be bound by it. Agency law requires no signed writing. Its existence can be based on the facts and circumstances. So can fiduciary status (which is a disfavored interpretation). You can still be bound by it even if you don’t sign it but begin performance. I have this discussion regularly with contractors I represent (although not on agency status). Only if no performance and no signature is provided will the contracting be avoided. 

Real estate contracting is treated differently because it generally involves the purchases and sale of land. Also, states often have statutes governing real estate contracting.

On 1/12/2024 at 11:19 AM, Dr. Balls said:

Back in 1996 at my comic shop, I asked local Marvel inker named Mike Halblieb to come in and sign for customers (he had a self-published book out and was also signing his Marvel stuff), he brought in a bunch of pages from his What If #84 assignment (penciled by Mark Pacella) and was selling them for a whopping $50 each - and no takers. I distinctly recall doing well enough at the shop that day that I could splurge, so I bought these three as he was wrapping up.

I absolutely loved original art, but being in Montana and the internet in it's infancy, there was almost no way to track down OA for me. But, I was 23 years old and broke, so the chances of me buying OA and hanging onto it were slim anyways.

I've cherished these for many years - and will never sell these ones, despite being able to sell anything I own that isn't nailed down. They remind me of my shop, the 90's, the wonderment of talking with a "Marvel" artist and hearing stories about creating art for a living (something I was working on in my own life), and how you'll never get a full-team X-Men page for $50.

That is a very nice piece.
One of the downsides of today’s market, IMO, is that very good work isn’t necessarily high priced work, and not everything by a fan favorite is particularly good. 

On 1/12/2024 at 12:00 PM, PhilipB2k17 said:

"Fiduciary" is a legal term of art, and can easily be used a proxy for all of the other statutory or contractual, or common law duties you specified. When you are talking about a multimillion-dollar art purchase, I should think you'd want your art agent to have a fiduciary responsibility to act solely for your benefit and in your best interests, rather than rely on a particular forum's law. But, again, it's a matter of taste, really. How much layering of legal protection do you want to put into a contract? 

They are not the same, and yes you should expressly include the word. Both owe duties of loyalty and obedience, but a fiduciary is held to a higher standard. See the Content Authority, Agent vs. Fiduciary. Where financial matters are concerned, I would recommend the specific use of the word “fiduciary” as it is a disfavored interpretation, compared to “agent”. In other words, if you don’t expressly say it, you may not get it.

On 1/11/2024 at 10:17 AM, Bronty said:

doesn't matter.   Prelims are all different sizes and degree of render.    Some can be tiny and extremely loose and some can be a good size and quite tight and polished.    The main takeaway there being there is a wide variance in what you get so the labels aren't super useful and you have to use your eyes.      

There can also be only one prelim per scene or as in your case several.   Its just what you expect when it comes to prelims and you factor that in.

Not necessarily, unless you distinguish between a prelim and a sketch. I have a (a few) covers which came with 3 different sketches for consideration for the cover.

Not at all. I don’t care much for either one, unless they are very detailed, and I really wanted an example of the artist’s finished work, but could not find it at a reasonable price.
 
Just out of curiosity, did the name “Coolines” ever come up?

On 1/10/2024 at 5:15 AM, Will_K said:

Hericane is a character from Penthouse Comix.  She even appeared on a cover. 

https://www.comics.org/issue/327550/

Great literature, I presume.

On 1/9/2024 at 11:55 AM, PhilipB2k17 said:

Well, you need to enter into a contract with the middleman whereby he agrees that he has a fiduciary duty to act in your bests interests when he is doing the legwork to find a piece of art. In other words, you either pay him a commission, or a flat fee, and he agrees that he will not double deal, or conspire to defraud you -- and that he acts in good faith subject to breach of contract, etc. 

 

I don’t agree with that. Fiduciaries have special duties under the law, like lawyers for example. You don’t have to be a fiduciary for the law to impose duties upon you. Anyone who intentionally commits a material misrepresentation of fact with knowledge that someone else will rely on it to his detriment commits classic fraud. Someone who accidentally misrepresents can be liable for negligent misrepresentation. Anyone who acts as an agent, whether by formal agreement or not, owes duties to the principal not to engage in double-dealing, but to work for the principal (with the existing legal relationship a matter of fact for a jury regardless whether there is a written contract). The law also imposes duties of “good faith and fair dealing” in any contractual relationship (at least in my states). Concealing material information from the Russian certainly sounds like it in this case. And, some states have Consumer Fraud laws which place special duties of disclosure and fair dealing on a seller which are beyond the common law (but they vary by state). Someone dealing with a NJ domiciliary who violates the Consume Fraud Act is liable for triple damages and attorneys fees. Not, however, for N.Y domiciliaries who have a different law.

Then we hit equitable remedies. If someone is aware that another person is relying on them, and the other person knowingly takes advantage of that reliance, then agreements can be voided and restitution ordered even if the misrepresentation is not negligent. So, the Russian could get back the difference he paid to the procurer and what the procurer of the art bought it for because of the advantage taken.

There are probably some more I could add to the list, but that should do to convince anyone at least in N.J. or N.Y. not to mess with shortcuts.

On 1/8/2024 at 12:07 PM, Bronty said:

The article is behind a pay wall for me, but on what basis is that determination being made?

Other articles mentioned he would invoice the Russian for artwork, not for services, which is more consistent with dealer than agent.

But, again, its behind a pay wall for me.

The Russian had to have an expectation that Bouvier was not doing this for free.     So, he had to expect that there was either a mark up, or that he'd be invoiced a percentage.

If he wasn't invoiced a percentage, it would likely have been pretty clear the work was being marked up to him. 

This is not a rube at play here.      This is a billionaire who's no doubt seen it all and then some.

Here are the key points from the article (involving the suit against Sotheby's, the case against the agent was apparently settled in a Swiss court). The essence of your point is in the last quoted paragraph. The art purchaser's (Rybolovlev's) case hinges on the issues of reliance on Bouvier, Bouvier's knowledge of that reliance, and essentially taking advantage of it with the active cooperation of Sotheby's. I found Sotheby's defense to be disconcerting, to say the least, and in a US court would not be impressive if the Russian can prove his claimed facts. Adhering to industry practice doesn't mean a whole industry isn't in violation of basic legal principles and potentially liable. Moreover, knowledge can be inferred from the arguable results:

"For years, Rybolovlev relied almost entirely on the collecting advice and negotiating skills of Bouvier, a Swiss private dealer better known in art circles for running an art-storage facility in Geneva. 

The Russian alleges Sotheby’s helped Bouvier source masterpieces to buy, helped hash out the deal terms and later reassured Rybolovlev that he was making savvy art purchases by writing gushy appraisals of the works, while knowing the collector was paying his go-between millions more than Bouvier paid Sotheby’s for each artwork.

...

Sotheby’s said that it “strictly adhered to all legal requirements, financial obligations and industry best practices during the transactions of these artworks. Any suggestion that Sotheby’s was aware of the buyer’s alleged misconduct or intention to defraud Mr. Rybolovlev is false.”

Bouvier, who last month settled his own legal dispute with Rybolovlev in Swiss court, has maintained that he did nothing wrong. His spokesman said Bouvier signed no contract with the collector and so was free to act in his own best interests as a private dealer and could charge Rybolovlev whatever he deemed appropriate for the art he resold. Bouvier won’t attend the coming trial, though he did provide a sworn deposition, the spokesman said." 

Those relationships between the Russian and the art procurer, and the procurer and the seller, and the seller's knowledge of the ultimate buyer, are what set the case apart from just "arbitrage".

Wall Street Journal has an article in today’s paper about it.

After reading it, I agree with the Russian tycoon even if it upends the art market. When you use someone as your purchasing agent, you have a legitimate expectation that the agent will engage in full disclosure about a transaction with you and not trade on the account for his personal benefit. If “x” bought something on day 1 knowing that “y” was planning to buy it, and if x had an agreement with y to arrange for its sale to y, then I do have a problem with this. Now, if x did not have a prior agreement with y, then I am okay with it because y had no reasonable expectation that x was acting in his own interest.

On 1/5/2024 at 1:56 PM, Brian Peck said:

I remember a collector, who would offer comic art to people but he didn't own the artwork. It would be up on a dealer's site or in a private collection. HE would "sell" it get the money, pay the real owner then send the artwork to the buyer and pocket the profits.

Both are scums.

Sounds a bit like arbitrage to me. 

On 1/4/2024 at 11:11 PM, Will_K said:

Like being addicted to plastic surgery, keeps getting worse.

At least this one is obvious.

On 12/31/2023 at 3:21 PM, mtlevy1 said:

Original art pedigree's interesting debate topic! 

Oooo goody. Now we can jump into regression analysis. 😵‍💫

On 12/25/2023 at 8:18 PM, delekkerste said:

No complete stories - there were a few multi-strip or multi-page lots by the same artist, but, all unique pieces. Mind you, the median cost per piece acquired is in the low $1Ks, and the mean cost is in the low $2Ks so we're talking about a few chunky pieces and the vast majority being smaller, fun pieces - lots of strip art; modern comic pages; niche nostalgic favorites that not a lot of people care about; mainstream nostalgic favorites but from 3rd tier artists and/or titles; etc. We're not talking about Byrne X-Men or Miller DKR/Daredevil here...that part of the market is, for the most part, just not fun anymore given where prices are.  

I will definitely be buying a lot, lot less in 2024 - it's been a fun couple of years of buying like crazy, but, it's time to be more targeted/focused again. 

Median and mean? And while we are at it, what was the mode?

On 12/26/2023 at 11:21 PM, Buzzetta said:

Neither do I.  

What I mean to articulate is basically this using myself as an example. 

 

I already have everything within my means at this point that I would want to have.   What else is there?  There is stuff I can afford if I really want it, but at the prices they are at, it no longer interests me, or I am throwing money at something just to get something else.   When it comes to comic and art collecting it seems to be a never ending chase for an ever growing list of "stuff." 

I liked it.

As Peggy Lee sang: “If that’s all there is, then let’s keep dancing. Just bring on the booze, and have, a ball.”