Nexus

On Wednesday, I opened up Daniel Warren Johnson's sketch list to my newsletter subscribers. There were 10 spots available at $500 each for a 6X9 sketch. The first 10 people to submit their request through the site would make the list. I have to manually disable the listing on my site in order to close the opportunity. I tried to do it as quickly as I could, but the site was running slow, even on the backend. It took me one minute from the listing going live to close it. In that single minute, we received 132 unique requests. For 10 spots. We actually received a much higher number of total requests, if we would include people who submitted their request multiple times. In terms of individual unique requests, though, it was 132. I counted. Bill Cox can verify. Who knows how much higher that number would have been if I had waited longer to close the listing? All to illustrate the difficulty in getting a sketch from DWJ. And the difficulty for us in making everyone happy.

Regardless, you're still selling all of an artist's work...because you haven't been able to get a sketch. So if you had gotten a sketch, you'd presumably still remain a fan. Still don't get it. Right. You say that now, and it *sounds* good...until we actually do implement a lottery. And you don't win. And as we run more lotteries with other people winning, we're then back to square one here with the agita. It's never a "good" system until you get the art. So there is no good system, because there's no system that guarantees you'll win. And until you win, there's just going to be this building resentment. Or to put it another way: I'll always be the bad guy to someone, until everyone gets what they want. Which is impossible. It's never going to happen. There's only so much art, there can only be so many commissions. Don't know what else to say. (I'm going to add as an aside that I don't take this as a personal dig, and that I consider D2 to be reasonable and polite relative to some others who have a beef with not getting art they want. That I deal with on a near-daily basis. Some people take it personally, for whatever reason, when none of this is personal at all.)

First off, if it's not fun, then don't participate. It's not worth the stress as you describe. I totally understand if people decide to stop following. But...as I said re: the Dueling Dealer show, it's impossible to make everyone happy. I just have to make ENOUGH people happy. So far, enough people are happy. Still, please tell me how you would do it differently. You're not the first one to grouse about how this is done. But I get the feeling that unless the person complaining gets the art they want, at a price they want to pay, any system will suck. I've been in your shoes, btw. For lots of artists. Including Adam Hughes. The situation was exactly as J.Sid describes. Another guy was Art Adams. I really wanted an Art Adams commission or sketch. The commission list was "full until he's dead" as his former rep informed me. So that left sketch lists at shows. And I always ended up getting beat out by others. They simply out-hustled me and wanted it more. Frankly, I could only make shows very infrequently, and had no interest chasing him around the country for a shot at his list. So I decided to live without an Art Adams sketch. I didn't then go home and sell off all my Art Adams comics or whatever. I was still a fan. I didn't need a sketch to remain a fan. I really don't get that at all. To each their own, I guess.

Wow, thanks Hekla! It's funny because I see the podcast as anything but professional. I'm not a professional interviewer. It's just two guys shooting the stuff about the hobby. That's what I set out for the show to be, allowing everyone to listen in on a conversation. Glad you're enjoying it! To the original topic, though, I would just say that no matter what issues folks may have with the DD show, the bottom line is it has a sizable audience, and they sell a lot of art. They're accomplishing what they've set out to do. I can see folks are divided on the comedy routines, but more people appear to like them than don't. From my point of view, at least they're trying to entertain and NOT just be a de facto QVC operation for comic art. Ultimately, it's impossible to make everyone happy; they're making ENOUGH people happy. Also, the DD show is just part of that channel. Bill is doing other shows, too, so can't say it's all just "low-brow" content. Seems like there's a little something for everyone. Even if you consider the DD show a negative, the overall channel is a net positive. My opinion only, as always.

First off, let me assure you that you are not being annoying. I'm asking people who are interested to write me; they are not obligated in any way to commit. So, zero problems if they don't. For now, though, I don't think I'm going to change anything in how we've been handling commissions. Mainly because it works, and I'm a "don't fix it if it ain't broke" kind of guy. Maybe there's a better way, and maybe I'll eventually adapt to a different system...but for now this works. Lists always fill up fast...why mess with a proven formula? Also, to a lesser degree, I'm keenly aware of how many other reps are trying to replicate our model (some to the point of outright plagiarism) and so prefer not to share everything publicly if I don't have to. I realize there are proxies who will inquire and share the information, but I don't have to make it any easier than it already is. Anyway, keep writing whenever you feel like it, it's no bother at all.

Sorry, been playing catch-up since Heroes, so haven't had a chance to answer this. Comix4fun pretty well lays it all out. Or as another friend puts it, dealers who REALLY don't want anyone to think of them as dealers, in order to preserve their phony amateur status. But there's also a specific example I can think of: Many years ago, there was a high-profile collector who would ingratiate himself with other collectors, especially new collectors. He'd very freely offer his advice on what pieces they should buy. The art would usually be with a dealer. How generous of this guy to share his experience and knowledge and advice, right? From one collector to another? Except this guy was the consignor of that art with the dealer. It was his art being sold through a dealer proxy. Which he never disclosed. When I called him out on it, he lied as he does. The dealer then lied to back up this lie. It's actually a thread here on the boards, if someone wants to dig it up. I don't like this guy. He apparently goes around saying now that I don't like him because I "don't like other people selling art for a profit". Which is total nonsense. I couldn't care less what people sell their art for. I just don't like people who do stuff like the above. Which I'll add is just one example in a long list of hobby horror stories. So if you ask me where I draw the line, it's right up to that guy. I'll be at SDCC in two weeks and happy to chat with anyone about any of this if they want!

A couple of notes on DWJ and art from our site in general... -- HeroesCon 2022 was the first time we've taken a pre-show sketch list that was open to attendees only. Prior to this, we had taken lists at the show OR taken them pre-show, but also made them available via mail-order. -- We last opened a proper commission list for Daniel in 2020. We took 50 requests then. We could have taken a LOT more, but took as many as we could within reason. Tried to accommodate as many as possible. -- His art is simply in high demand. Extremely high demand. I just counted and since 2016, we've dropped 1548 pieces of art for Daniel. All of them have sold. (Everything sold prior to 2016 has been deleted from the site, otherwise that number would be even higher.) You can see for yourself in his gallery: https://www.felixcomicart.com/ArtistGalleryTitles.asp?ArtistId=576 -- Whenever the site receives an order, I'm notified via e-mail. There'd been some wonkiness with this recently, so Bill Cox (who admins my site), bcc'd himself to try to troubleshoot. So whenever there's a drop, he personally experiences the flood of e-mails that arrive. Go to 2:57 of his recent YouTube show: He notes that he received over 250 requests for our Nick Pitarra/AX-WIELDER JON drop. There were 29 pieces for that drop. So almost 10 requests for every piece. That means most people who requested a piece, did not get one. I use that as an example because Daniel's drop are even crazier. Hence, more people will not get anything than those who will. -- Also, although I try to answer all e-mails as fast as possible, sometimes it does take a while. This is not a perfect system, but I do my best. And I believe it is still the fairest system. -- We know that if we were to auction commission/sketch spots, we'd do a lot better. A con sketch, for example, was just auctioned for $1700 at Heroes. We know of proper commissions that have sold for $10K+. As it stands now, though, we'd still like to make these opportunities available to everyone, and not just the highest bidders. From my side of the table, for whatever that's worth.

Depends. Depends if it’s a dealer or a dealer who pretends to be a collector.

Absolutely. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Except *I* didn't say anyone "pumped and dumped". That was Dave. Listen again. You're ascribing what he said to me. Regardless, no one's blaming new collectors for price increases or hype or whatever. I sell to a lot of new collectors. The vast majority of them do not care about first appearances. They're into art from books they enjoy, artists they follow on social media, etc. They're into commissions. They are not investors. Perhaps there's small distinction between "investor" and your traditional garden variety speculator or flipper. But what they have in common is a primary interest in profit potential. From new collectors, I mostly hear how they love a certain artist or book. From an investor, it's usually about how a new character might fit into the MCU. We all know the investor when we see them. Telling then, who took immediate offense when they heard what Dave said.

Thank you! There's always a "but". I don't remember what VENOM #25 sold for, but it was $20K for the Dark Ages Miles, and $40K for the Titan. In terms of the Miles, no false advertising. As a cover, it did appear after #2. But it predated everything as published ad/promo art. If the SANDMAN ad that sold recently counts as a "first appearance", then so does this piece. But, if I do get something wrong, I would absolutely agree to a refund. In this case, I knew exactly what the piece was and what it would be used for, because Ryan told me. This was well in advance of the actual series coming out, and what order the art would be used for the covers. We actually sat on those DARK AGES pieces for almost a year. Otherwise, I know a lot of the resentment that stems from this is because I'm getting top dollar for the artists now. There's no (or at least, limited) opportunity for immediate profit on a resale. If the price was "right" to the new first appearance investors, then *they'd* be the one hyping it like I did. That I may have taken that chance away, is cause for resentment. But I have to get as much as I can for the artists, ESPECIALLY in the case of a first appearance. They only have one shot. I have no idea what's going to end up happening with Titan. I'm privy to some plans, but who knows how things will ultimately work out. What I do know, though, is that no first appearance is too obscure to the new investor class in the hobby. Hence "birth pages". And as much as it's a joke now, I wouldn't be surprised to see "in utero" pages become a thing, too. I actually advised Ryan to hold onto the art. Partly because who knows, and partly because, believe it or not, I'm not entirely comfortable with where these values have been going. But Cliff (the inker) wanted to sell, so we did. Was $40K too much? The buyer didn't think so. Or if he did, he paid it anyway. Not a newbie, but that's besides the point. Anyone who is paying a premium for a new first appearance is gambling. On the flip side, the artist who sells, is gambling, too. What are the first appearances of Knull and Cosmic Ghost Rider worth? More or less than $40K? I have no idea. But I did sell those before this first appearance mania, and they are definitely worth a lot more now. There's always a chance that might happen. So again, I'm going to get as much as I can for the artist when we sell. I transformed the modern art market, yes. The hype is the easy part, and what every other rep has now been trying to replicate. The hard part you don't see. But otherwise, this sort of criticism about "hype" isn't new. A few years ago, in this very thread, there was a debate that I "overhype" my artists. One poster, in particular, found my promotion egregious and undeserved. He singled out the following artists: James Harren, Daniel Warren Johnson, Tradd Moore, Geoff Shaw. I stood by what I said then and I stand by it now: That I find these artists to be extraordinary talents, and that time would tell how they were viewed. I would bet quite favorably. It's been five years since that debate. There's still a long way to go, but at least at this moment, five years later...was I wrong? None of that has anything to do with first appearances, btw.

Examples?

A Forbes story on the cover, inspired by the podcast: https://www.forbes.com/sites/robsalkowitz/2022/06/21/an-iconic-batman-image-just-sold-for-24-million-who-actually-created-it

I don't recall if Dave said it's the best piece Heritage has ever had, but I might have. For me, DKR #1 is the best comic art thing HA has ever offered. Again, for me. Also, the cover wasn't offered to him originally. As he said on the podcast, and as Mitch confirms now. But even if it had been, I'm not sure he would have gotten it. Remember, he'd already acquired the splash for (at the time) an insane number. As much as he loves DKR, I imagine there's a limit to how many pieces he'd be willing to spend insane numbers for, no matter how great. Consistent with that, DKR #2 cover was auctioned a year later, is unquestionably all-Miller, and he passed on that as well.

I can't remember talking about it on the podcast (maybe I have, but my memory runs short these days...unless I'm holding a grudge). But yes, the existence of 181 became known to certain collectors at SDCC 2017. That was when I ran into an old acquaintance, someone who's not involved in OA in any way. He said he had come across something recently that I might be interested in seeing. He pulled up a pic on his phone: It was the OA cover for HULK #181. My first thought was maybe this was one of Trimpe's recreations. But there were other clues in the pic that made it seem possible this could be the real thing. I asked my friend if I could share this pic with some collecting buddies at the show. He said no way, that this was for my eyes only. He half-admitted that he may have taken this picture surreptitiously (he didn't realize what a big deal it was until I let on, and then realized maybe he shouldn't have just taken a shot of it). I then asked if it was OK if I only showed a few select others the pic from *my* phone, but didn't distribute the pic otherwise. That he was OK with; he'd known me long enough to know I wouldn't burn him. It was just too good not to show a handful of friends at the show. Gene was one of the few I showed the pic to. We all pretty much agreed that it LOOKED good...but without seeing it in person, couldn't say 100% for sure if it was the real thing or a recreation. Fast-forward another year or so, and it turns out it was the real thing, and that real thing might be available for the right price. Beyond that...no comment. But it's been long enough otherwise to share the "SDCC phone pic" story. If/when the art does sell, maybe I'll get some of the principals together again for a podcast.

Totally agree. LOVE Varley's work. My favorite color work ever. "Color guide" or not, though, still have no interest in owning one at market value.

Thanks, Dan! I don't think there's any struggle with painted pieces...by the primary artist. When one artist does it all. That's not color guides. At the same time, Varley's paintings aren't your average color guides, either. And why the #1 cover is a bit fuzzy. Because she's so damn good. But whatever the cover is or isn't, it's likely we'll have more consensus over time. Or at least be more at peace with it all. Like I've said before, in the end, it's indisputably the #1 cover. All else will just be details the further away we go. I understand, too. However, while it's certainly harder to get a foothold in the hobby than ever before, due to exponentially increasing values, I don't believe it's especially punishing. Because no one's losing their shirts. Everyone's a genius/winner when everything (or what feels like everything) only goes up. If/when that changes, we'll get a better sense of what's what.

The original art cover for Frank Miller's THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS #1 has just sold at auction for 2.4 million dollars...and who better to talk to us about it than the King of DKR art collectors, David Mandel. Hear Dave's take on the art, the auction, and what it all means for the OA hobby at large. As usual, Dave doesn't hold back! To the point where we may be asked to take this down. It's happened before. So listen while you can! The Felix Comic Art Podcast (Episode 50): David Mandel and THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS #1 That's all in the first hour. As a bonus we've also included two recent podcasts from our friends Christian Mongaard and Casey Lau. Their guest? It's Dave again! So if you just can't get enough Dave, we've got FOUR more hours for you! Thanks to Christian and Casey for letting us share their shows! It's DKR. It's Dave Mandel. Enjoy! Felix www.felixcomicart.com

He's held onto everything post-SSB. But everything before that is pretty much out there. The issue is that very few people are letting things go. Especially not SSB. The numbers are tempting, of course, but it's one of those things that if you sell, you're unlikely to ever get another example. So most are still hanging on for now.

As a matter of fact, yes. Longtime collector in the FB OA group was very confident that it wouldn't break $1M. His reasoning was because the #3 cover had just sold for under $300K. And because $1M is "a lot of money". (Same guy also publicly stated that the $200K sale of the ULTIMATE FALLOUT #4 cover with Miles Morales had to be fake...because no other Mark Bagley cover had come close to that amount before. We're not talking about a genius here.) He was so confident, that he gleefully looked forward to rubbing other people's $1M+ guesses in their faces when this was over. Even better, he offered to eat his hat on Bill Cox's Comic Art Live show if the cover went for over $1M. Which of course it did within 24 hours. So we all have that to look forward to, at least.

The people John talked to about this piece are listed in his CFA-APA article. IMO, that Royer and Sinnott inked copies of the pencils is neither here nor there. I can understand why someone who owned the pencils would commission the work, to perhaps help legitimize the piece. But it's just an inking job...that they would take the gig doesn't necessarily indicate anything.

Not the same piece of writing. He wrote about it for CFA-APA a while later, and after more research. I'll ask if he'll be able to share here.

Your FACTS are missing some facts... My friend won it at HA in 2009 for $21510. It had presumably been consigned by Mark M. In 2011, it came to his attention that the piece may not be full-Kirby pencils. Or any Kirby pencils at all. Upon consulting with renowned Kirby scholars, he realized that it wasn't what he thought it was when he bought it. In 2012, he consigned it back to HA. He insisted this time that the description include the possibility that the piece was done by an assistant(s). It then resold for $10157.50. Less than half the original result. It then shows up on Mike Burkey's site. Shortly after, in Rob Pistella's CAF. Where a long comment thread ensued, with various parties making the case for/against. Mostly against, it must be said. (I have the page saved before Rob took it down.) At that point, Rob came up with the designation "Studio of Jack Kirby" for artist attribution. In 2018, Rob found a taker. So that makes at least 5 owners, not 3. I did not know you are the current owner. Because the piece has shown up on various venues for sale/auction since. Ankur was selling it for a while, too (and said it had sold?). From all appearances, it had been sold repeatedly since you got in 2018, and your ownership of it was several links ago in the chain. None of that is made up. I have the original CAF page with all the comments saved in HTML. Not sure if I'm able to post here. As well, my friend who was the first HA buyer wrote a lengthy and well-researched article about this piece for CFA-APA. Not sure if that can be shared or reproduced. But any CFA-APA members can probably read it. Regardless, none of that is made up, either. Hope that fills in some of the blanks for you.

The people who have bought this piece over the past few years (and there have been many) DEFINITELY wanted to believe that this was a legit Kirby pencil piece. And then they DEFINITELY wanted everyone else to believe that, too. Somehow, I DEFINITELY believe that if anyone truly concluded they were holding the real thing...they would have kept it.

An experience like this is practically a rite of passage in Artists Alley. We all have stories about unhappy interactions with certain artists. At the same time, hopefully your daughter learned that when an artist says they don't want to sketch, to take them at their word and move on.

Your art is doozy Our prices make you woozy Our show's different Your art is claimy After we touch, art clammy Totally not same Like big art you do And you say you cannot lie We just like big art -- from the collected works of Dealmakers of Comic Art (2022)