Rick2you2

What he has done, and he should be complimented for it, is to create the artistic equivalent of the original McDonald’s Cheeseburger (if you haven’t seen the movie “The Founder”, you might not appreciate the relationship). He generates an excellent product at an inexpensive price which is affordable by many, using technology and labor efficiency to make it work. It’s not the Palm, but it is real beef.

Nope.

BCW top loaders are made using PVC, not Mylar, according to its website. It is not suitable, according to this website Gaylord Archival (which sells archival polyester used in Mylar, and thus, has a vested interest in its sale): https://www.gaylord.com/resources/understanding-plastics-for-preservation Understanding Plastics for Preservation WHICH PLASTIC IS BEST FOR MY NEEDS? ARCHIVAL POLYESTER: Archival polyester (PET) is also known by the brand names Melinex and Mylar. It is chemically inert with a high tensile strength and chemical and dimensional stability. It is extremely clear and will never yellow or become cloudy, making it ideal for encapsulation where a detailed view of the covered item is desired. Inherent static electricity helps to keep items from shifting in enclosures but also means that archival polyester should not come in contact with charcoal, pastels or other loose media. For document storage, you will find envelopes, sleeves, L-sleeves, folders and page protectors made out of archival polyester. In sheets and rolls, it can be used to line wooden shelves as a protective barrier, to make book jacket covers and to cover rolled textiles. This versatile material is chemically inert and therefore will not break down over time, proving it to be an excellent choice for long-term protection of your artifacts. POLYPROPYLENE: A chemically inert material that is also heat-resistant and provides a highly protective barrier against moisture and vapors. It is slightly less clear than archival polyester but is clearer and more rigid than polyethylene. POLYETHYLENE: A chemically inert material that is highly flexible and easy to work with. It has a filmy appearance but is an economical choice for items that need protection but not complete transparency. SAY NO TO PVC! Polyvinyl chloride (aka PVC and vinyl) is a thermoplastic that is widely used to make everything from plumbing pipes to children's toys. It has also been used to make photo storage pages. In order to make PVC more flexible, plasticizers have been added to the compound that should be considered dangerous and damaging to archival materials. These plasticizers will not only release chemical gases into the air, but will cause the breakdown of the material over a surprisingly short period of time. Photo pages will seem "oily" to the touch and will begin to soften and yellow. To protect your photos from damage, say no to PVC and look for polypropylene pages instead. VIEW AND DOWNLOAD OUR FREE INFOGRAPHIC "KNOW YOUR ARCHIVAL PLASTICS" Let me add that I think Itoya's are made with Polypropylene. If what this says is accurate, then storage using them for art, in general, without a mylar sleeve, should be okay. I still wouldn't trust it with really valuable stuff, but I am not a chemist or expert, and could be wrong.

If Hulk were a DC character, not in the short run. In the short run, they are likely to go up, at least as to the newer stuff. But as a character fades from conscienceness, it only seem logical that interest in the character’s art will decline (with some special exceptions, like the Spirit, but even there, the prices for his groundbreaking OA haven’t kept pace with increases of a lot of newer artists).

Dropping floppies is something more than a few insiders have said, but the problem with doing so is the floppies create a lot of exposure for new characters or reimagined characters to create the valuable IP that AT&T wants. They also create a fan base allowing for a level of guaranteed sales which might not exist. Would Deadpool have been made if there wasn’t fan awareness? I doubt it. Going all digital might work for older readers, but not the casual reader who might just be getting his/her feet wet. It would require more searching, and little guidance. A long slow death, unless AT&T figured out a way to make them easily accessible. I also think it would have a significant impact on OA if there were no comics published at all. Look at the prices of Pogo strips. How have they held up? They are not reprinted like Peanuts. So, secondary characters are likely to lose value (which is already less than main characters).

A rumor was run as an article in Cosmic Book News attributing to Ethan Van Sciver a claim from an AT&T insider that DC is shutting down publishing in June, although AT&T will continue to produce movies and TV shows based on its property. While I find that hard to believe (and yes, Van Sciver is a bit ... unique), even if it doesn’t make AT&T much money. So, I was wondering what you all might think it would do to the value of art? Rarer? Yes. But less exposure to potential future buyers, leading to reduced demand? Just something to kick around.

Wrong forum. You want marketplace.

I’d also love to see the sales ”curve”. The information would be even more valuable if differentiated by type/artist/other, to see what is actually hot.

Makes me wonder why he would invest in it.

If that is part of the deal: we don’t know that.

It seems concerning on first blush, but I don’t see the harm unless he is actively engaged in controlling what is posted. The pricing info. is available to all, and there doesn’t appear to be any prioritization for advertisers. The question I would have is why?

As I recall, I saw it on day 1. It was okay, but not brilliant, IMHO. I generally don’t trust search functions to catch everything. All it takes is a slight misspelling or to have the item misidentified, and you’re toast. I once found a very nice Phantom Stranger piece that had been mislabeled as the Phantom Strangler. Grabbed it. So, I go through all of them—fast.

I enjoyed it, seeing new things I had not seen before. I didn’t really expect any discounts on pricing, at least from dealers, but that didn’t mean I had to buy them, either. Unfortunately, there was nothing new for me in any event. Let me second the idea of a separate area for attendees to “chew the fat” like in a real show. Perhaps artists could sign in, too, since they not only get to hear from their fans, but maybe score some commission work or sell unposted things they have lying around in their basements. I’ll even supply the virtual beer.

I did see a Baronness commission up for sale.

If you’re from New York, it’s pronounced “cough”.

Isn't that the first name of an artist? I'm a KAF guy.

It is slightly larger, as well as brighter.

Lot of nice, new things I haven’t seen before. Also, quite a fair number of reasonably priced ones. For anyone interested, ahem, I didn’t spot any Baronness art. No Peanuts, either. Weak selection on the Phantom Stranger. Several “Bitz”, one non-hero for $250. A few Metamorpho’s if anyone cares (does anyone?) Any other characters of interest when I look again tomorrow?

I would not be surprised if it now sells for over $1,000,000. Whether the “buyer” is real, or just a creating a market floor at that price is now the real question.

After everything being written about bad auction practices, I guess my sensitivity to bad business practices is a bit heightened right now. You raise a good point, but not quite where the law heads. If the seller had no reason to know of his/her potential mistake, it can be rescinded. The gap, as you pointed out, might suggest he now had reason to know something, but he/she might not know or not know much. The fact that Burkey didn't explain why the increase was being offered could work against him. On the other hand, he was also taking a chance it wasn't what he thought it was; that works in his favor (it was a gamble, not a sure thing). Furthermore, if the piece, if authentic, was actually worth $100,000, Burkey would have a problem justifying that $5,000 offer in the face of a later challenge. Where the subject is more likely applicable is if Burkey simply sent the seller a note saying "sold for $300". For those of you who might run into that amazing "barn find" in a garage sale, be careful. As the saying goes on Wall Street: you can be a bull or a bear, but don't be a pig. Finally, I recognize there was no attempt to get more money. The legal doctrine (unilateral mistake) would result in a reversal of the sale and return of the item if still in the buyer's possession. If not, then the seller gets the fair value of the loss.

Assuming the cover was worth a lot more than $5,000, the seller might be able to reclaim it, or its value, under the legal doctrine of “unilateral mistake”. The fact that he “ took a chance” may make it okay.

Vive la France! (Sure beats snail eatin').

It would be nice to know how many postings I have skimmed through as I go along. When there were pages, it was easy: page 4 out of 8, half done.

Some items are listed as “sold or removed”. Are they supposed to still show up? Your diligence is impressive.