Rick2you2

This one. ! That’s $21.98 for 100 of them, plus tax and shipping. Roughly 25 cents per bag.

I confess to knowing almost nothing on the subject, but the way the feet are cut off on panel 2 is a bit odd. Could this be a copy from something else that was bigger?

Then why were people walking around with loose art? Besides, we’re not talking Mylar. Just a lousy bag. You can even imprint your name on it and get free advertising. Dark Horse has been getting plenty of free advertising from me (which is a much better bag than I have in mind). What could be the price? 40 cents?

I know, and kudos to you.👍 It should be standard practice. Someone spends, say, $500, and the dealer can’t provide a bag? My supermarket does (at least for now). And those purchases aren’t nearly as expensive. Heritage does, and it only gets 21% of the purchase price, plus shipping and handling.

So, general question: why don’t dealers regularly provide some inexpensive bags to protect the stuff they sell? I do have a portfolio bag, but it’s awkward to carry around and I usually leave it in my car unless I really need it (like at NY Comicon). I’m also a bit nervous of damage if I carry art loose (or something loose may fall off). Heck, I’d even pay for a bag if it were available.

The last sentence is why even a small discount makes sense. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. When I see something on line, I may or may not buy it. But when I see it in front of me, I can be sure of what I want. The dealer gets instant money to recycle, in cash (which I suppose will be declared 🤔, even while leaving no”paper trail”) and doesn’t have to wait around for another buyer, who, in that case, hasn’t yet materialized for at least 6 months (I know when it first went on-line). Trust me on this one, it isn’t moving quickly for good reasons.

And thanks for the discount. If Albert had been willing to do the same, I would have gone home 100% satisfied. Let me add that you can see a change in styles of sexy female form over the decades with this piece. She has an extremely narrow waist, like with Eisner’s femme fatales, and a relative modest chest size compared to now. Kate Hepburn, meet Kim Kardashian.

I may be confusing him with someone else, but did he die, and his widow is selling off his art? It might be someone else. Heard it a few months ago.

I didn’t realize that was you.😊

He’s a long time collector who has untouchables, as well as things he buys and sells. The phrase was mine; too many years worth of Wall Street Journal readings, I guess. He was astonished at how high prices have gotten, and was expressing disbelief they were sustainable. Lots of us have expressed similar thoughts. Hidden from view by the high prices of some slices of this hobby is the fact that some things don’t move much. I remember looking at one piece Anthony’s had listed for 6 years before it sold. This is such a nostalgia-based hobby that excellent artists’ works can languish due to the subject matter, or style, or characters being unpopular. Such is life. I agree that stagnant pricing is more likely than published drop; more person to person discounting first. The dealer voluntarily knocked off $150 on a piece he listed for $750 this Sunday, which really was the current market price, because it wasn’t moving. My guess is that unpopular pieces/artistic runs from the 1960’s- 1980’s are good buys—not for appreciation, just enjoyment.

Maybe he should have priced it as an NFT.

While I recognize that the higher end stuff has been going up, a lot, I haven’t seen that impact. The things I buy tend to be idiosyncratic, not popular, so while there have been a few surprises, they have been livable. If you cull out the art that has gotten hot, and want to pick up something by, say, Jerry Grandinetti, I haven’t seen anything close to a doubling. Which is making me wonder why the entire market is viewed as hot vs. slices of it.

Question: is the quality of offerings (e.g. anticipated prices based on recent sales) going to soon outstrip the willingness of people to pay for them? At the show, I had a chat with another collector, with significant holdings, who felt we are beginning to see that, with a lot of art coming onto the market. I don't think it is there quite yet, but we may soon be at a tipping point, particularly when people with money will be able to spend it on other things soon. Let me add that he was focused on items above $5K, as he felt the prices below that amount could be sustainable.

I would have liked to buy a second piece, but a dealer wouldn’t lower his price even for all cash. Oh, well.

At today's show, I bought what I consider a great piece of "good girl" art by Jack Sparling from 1952. No, he isn't a popular artist nor is the subject, the piece has been listed for sale for quite a while, and it is unlikely to go up in value (several of these pin-ups have been on sale over the last 5 years or so in the $700 range). But the piece screams presence (it is a twice up), and is an excellent piece of artisanship IMO. As a bonus, you also get to see Sparling doing a bit of war art with it. An under-appreciated artist. First, what I bought, and second, the published version. FYI, I Iike to keep digital copies of published art with copies of the originals.

Pick a different subject where the art is plentiful and cheaper.

Come and gone. Nicer room, but everything I liked was already on line.

I wish some boardies would post their real names here or their board names at the show.

Occasionals are welcome, and we are actually happy to have more join the party. While there will be art for under $1K, be warned--how do I say this politely-- that different dealers have different approaches to "mark-up" (The name Donnelly should ring a bell here, but to a lesser extent, some others can be pretty stiff on pricing). Art is unique, and prices for art also vary by subject, and book, for the same artist (as well as pencller/inker combinations). Anthony's is a safe choice. Just be prepared to wade through a lot of books and pages of mediocre stuff to find a gem. A lot of art changes hands for under $1,000. Probably most of it changes hands under $2,000 (if not $1,000). In my view, the price of art is not commensurate with quality (which is pretty subjective anyway). It is more commensurate with nostalgia and the fan base for the artist--which is good for you if you aren't driven by those criteria. Not to say there is no quality criteria at work; there is, it is just not proportional to price.

I think you mangled my point about NFT's. There is rarely any reason to actually own the art if you can view an (assumed top notch) image of it. Some art, with a 3-D aspect (layered paint as well as sculpture or projects like by Christo) really needs the original to enjoy 100%. But, most people--not all people-- get sufficent enjoyment out a reproduced version for there to be no rational explanation to justify the difference beween a $5 print and a $100,000 painting. NFT's even less so.

For the most part, we don’t buy art for the privilege of looking at it. We buy it for the pleasure or profit of owning it. If we only acquired art to look at it, we’d be downloading photo’s, buying books or cheap prints. Same with NFT’s. We get to say, to ourselves or others, I own that and it’s an NFT. That means I had money to waste, or invest, which others don’t. And, there is nothing wrong with that. Whatever floats your boat, unless you get hit by a tidal wave.

🥺

With the extra space, it would have been nice if some suppliers came. I know I can order by phone or internet, but it’s easier if someone is there, particularly for top loaders.

I can’t wait to see what will next keep this thread alive. I vote nm for Not Much.