vodou

Ah just realized I wanted to pull this out too. Sorry, disagree with you here. Creativity requires shutting out external noise. That very much includes the stuff you mention. And pestering will get you nowhere except alienating that artist further. The mistakes made were earlier in the process: not setting dates/accountability/penalties. Do that right, no need to pester, no need to draw the artist back into the real world to reply, the results (or lack of) speak for themselves.

A lot of us have gone through this, and those that produce art have been on the other side too. I pulled that one sentence to quote because: this is the artist telling you how it will be if nothing comes up all week, including really good episodes of his favorite tv show or a hot new release blu-ray with tons of extra featues. No friends dropping by, no magic deadlines moving up two weeks, no fights with the wife/girlfriend, no other commissioners (offering to pay double to move up the list!), etc etc. One week for $700 is timed to perfection. Which is not real. That's the artist's mistake, not knowing himself and reality and backing the thing out by a month or two, always, allowing that cushion. "Barring unforeseen circumstances" is sort of a clue though...he knows but hates telling you something you don't want to hear (..."two months? Fergit it!") How to fix this? Short of using escrow service, even half upfront puts you at risk. And if there is not a real deadline (like it's the illo for wedding invites or something like that), does it matter? One week, one month, three months? Really? Get past six months and it's a 'real' problem in my book. Not that you shouldn't get a quote for a real time within 15% of reality, just not sure what the big difference is a week, several weeks, coupla months? So the fix, I think, is to build the penalty in upfront, in writing. This way everybody is clear and no games later. You agree on the terms of the commission, and then set the penalty at either a discount or upgrade to a higher level commission (quality, media, size or all). And set the dates (from payment), all of 'em, in stone. You want prelims, then set a few dates for that and whatever else mid-process you're wanting to see. Same as you'd run a project at your job (and if you don't, start practicing, do this in all facets of your life personal and professional...you'll be amazed how a higher level of organization/accountability gets you more respect, promotions, raises/bonuses and marital harmony!) As calendar or business days. Etc. That's the e-mail agreement you want for PayPal and small claims court (if it comes to that). That's the e-mails you can post publicly. UCC allows up to 30 days (last I checked) for shipment of goods from payment date or agreed date (if more than 30 days), unless a new date is set and agreed upon by both parties before then. Paying by friends/family...you can still do this (so the recipient gets no fees) by funding with a credit card. This preserves your charge-back capability, it's just that you "pay" for that protection instead of the recipient.

Er, I guess? But not really. You make a point, it just hasn't convinced me

Interesting to me that some (many?) of you hit the YouTube videos first. I prefer to enjoy my dinner, the audio interviews, before dessert. The delayed gratification makes the show 'n tell that much more fun. And the audio interview lend context too!

I really wanted that Magnus page but bowed out when it pushed past my comfort zone. Congratulations on nailing, it's wonderful!

I dig it. Not feeling this one at all. Give Bats a cane and Mr. Natural beard...I may change my mind

Well said. I'm loving much of his exaggerated "grotesque" art as much as I enjoyed his clean, fluid works in the past. There is no doubt about his ability and accomplishments and I think you need to reach those levels before breaking the rules. Ditto Koa. His art starting 'breaking down' as early as Ronin imo anyway. The space between the Wolvie LS and Ronin is rather wide stylistically. Likewise the space between DD and Wolvie LS (though not as obviously dramatic, at the time). Took me a while to 'get' post-Wolvie Miller, equally so Mignola's mature style...but wow, once you 'get' them...it's 'art' not just workmanlike comics drawing so heavily on those that came before (e.g. Buckler, Sal B., both of whom I like too but for very different reasons).

I'd love to see Marv "visit" Riverdale. Just Marv by Miller, all the rest by whoever is doing Archie books these days (classic style though, not that new weird hipster look!!)

Which I think raises a very interesting sub-question for everyone: Is it better to have loved and lost [comic art] than to have never loved at all [by being too late for that which remains hidden in decades old black holes]? Re-stating the question that started this, there is everything that's good about insta-gratification via the technology of the internet and affordable computing, but then there's the bad too. What one can do now, anyone can do all other things being equal. What's not equal is disposable income/wealth. That's what makes it more a money than hard-work game now. Is it really better to regularly see dream pieces bubble up and out of your reach at every auction or not even know where they are? I wondered where my grail was for twenty-five years. It was not "in the hobby". And then it was, and was even offered to me. Alas at a price that I had to choke down. That didn't bother me so much though, except that there was no fun left in the piece for me. It was full market, probably a few years out, and then some. There was no fun in it. So I passed. I think it was better when I still thought it was "out there" and could just randomly pop up at any time for FMV or thereabouts, ya know? The real lesson was: I prefer "fun" to "grail", which was not the original plan, but sure has worked for a long time

Somewhere in one of the threads on this matter, HA posted that they don't allow consignors to bid on their own lots. Oh that was sooooo January .

So mike was working within the rules. No "was" about it. Unless similar language "was" in past sale terms too (each and every one of them). Ah but why focus on the negative when the really good news is that Mike and his friends can shill away the February sale with HA's blessing! For that matter, so can we all!! At least (now) everybody knows

I think a lot of us, myself included, were collectors first, humans second. Big ol' hoo-rah to those that have 'converted' to the other way around

Yes it's a pun Terry. Google Brendan Danielsson images* if you like, a lot of his style is effed up faces and people. No explanations given. *Warning some of his stuff is NSFW.

Very happy to get this (after eight years of looking). http://www.comicartfans.com/gallerypiece.asp?piece=1290668

Okay. I meant that it is a place to start, where HA was saying there is no place to start. None us outside Mike/friends knows anything for certain -just the things that don't pass our individual smell tests.

so basically a CYA "nothing to see here, move along" with no substance. I can understand not wanting to publicly name the shill proxy bidders, but they should be named to the auction houses. otherwise, the apology is just empty words. no way to verify or audit what went on. The proxies will not be named unless there is a lawsuit (criminal or civil) and the co-conspirators names obtained via discovery. That much should be obvious. HA is playing dumb (to an extent). At least 'one' and maybe 'some' of the co-conspirators are the 'winning bidders' of all the pieces identified on the first several pages of Glen's Weird topic. Also Kirby Fantastic Four 41 page 11 which I identified. That's a small but still useful sample to begin with. All of which is already available to be investigated in-house to identify potential shill situations all Mike's other consignments. Certainly patterns of behavior will become evident. The sleuths around here can probably find more examples too and pass them to HA, if motivated. Mike said 100 pieces were shilled by friends. Understand how strong HA's position is here, by dealing with only one-off inquiries, they can answer one-off privately (making anything posted here hearsay) avoiding sweeping statements (and/or gestures of goodwill) and never have to address any pieces where the winner does not contact them, does not ask "wtf?" That's called containment. To nobody's advantage but HA's. 100% disclosure, or anything even close to that can only come from Mike though. And as Peter states, probably only under discovery. He already voluntarily shot himself in the foot , unlikely to happen again. However -the next time somebody calls in, give them this idea above and see what they say, give them some room to work and and make a public statement. The hiding in the shadows, the willful blindness, needs to end.

I hope so, I really like all the guys at HA, Clink and CC. By the way, as a small business owner myself...I know opportunity when I see it. Sometimes it's about making money, other times about improving market share and presence in the community you serve. This is opportunity knocking (ya hear it ComicLink and ComicConnect??) Get ahead of your competitors and win the adoration of the hobby by leading instead of following. Talk to your lawyers and figure out how much you can disclose, hopefully everything re: Mike and his bidders, and make the statement. Then watch your competitors follow (really shuffle behind you, into the light) and the hobby be a better place immediately (but not for Mike and his proxy-bidding friends.)

Mike, it's a big start that you came back at all and better yet with an apology. There are elements of what you write that could be construed as appeasing the masses, some use of "if" and other words that give the impression you still don't think what you did is wrong (but accept could be illegal?), that you are going with the flow. I get that feeling myself, but I think most will welcome your statement. If people have a problem with that, well it is what it is. You are entitled to address this in your own manner of communication, it's not an allocution. However nice your "go forward" intentions are though, there is the matter of all that has come before. 100% of the speculation is occurring because nobody knows the body of pieces your "actions" entail and the details. You don't have to reveal any of this (unless legally compelled to do so), but I think you should voluntarily and doing so would kill all the serious run-wild chatter. At least in the sense of "how many and for how much". So there you go. I'm asking that you... Please identify: 1. Original art item 2. Name of auction house, date of 'sale' 3. Your "hidden" reserve 4. Name of 'Friend/s' bidding as your proxy.* 5. Final (or top) 'friend' bid 6. Result: "Sold to a non-proxy third-party" or "sold to a proxy". This should be broken down by consignment transaction, not by piece as the same piece may have received the same proxy bid "treatment" multiple times at more than one auction house over a period of time. Do this Mike and most of the questions and scenario speculation will die off, but you may open yourself to being contacted by the real people on the other end seeking restitution or maybe granting blanket forgiveness. That's up to them, and between you and them. As an example, I do not think I was directly harmed by what you and friends have done, but I do not know. I may never know, but if you do the above and lay it all out for everybody...I will have a much better sense of the thing and much of the trust can be restored. In my eyes, to my knowledge, this situation is the only black mark on your reputation. I was as surprised as anybody, not that this happens, but that you were involved -even ring-leading. This can be walked back, per above. Until then, I don't know for certain so the most conservative route is status quo, is to assume I have potentially been harmed and to continue pursuing the facts (to find out for sure) coming out legally. Nobody really wants or needs this, that's why a voluntary release of information is best. This is for me, my piece of mind. But I think you should do it for everyone else as well. If you won't do this, please at least make a statement to that effect. I'm sure any number of people will be okay with even that. But you'll have your critics too, for sure. . . . *This a nice to have for those of us that would avoid all future interaction with those folks, the same folks that have been silent while you have publicly addressed things. But understandable that you may not share...those persons would certainly not appreciate being outed.

ComicConnect (Metropolis) as an auction house is involved too. Likely to a much lesser degree though.

Sort of like this Kirby FF page. 1. 2009 HA sold $6500 http://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/jack-kirby-and-vince-colletta-fantastic-four-41-page-11-original-art-marvel-1965-/a/7002-92148.s?ic4=GalleryView-ShortDescription-071515 2. 200x-2015 Romitaman.com unsold $14000. (I think Mike was the buyer at HA, but unprovable.) 3. 2015 HA "sold" $13100 (note: Under Mike's "list" $14000, assume shill outbid everyone else, there was no organic bidder willing to go higher). 4. 2016 Romitaman.com unsold (so far) $14000 (again). Form your own judgement. Mike, the shill (if any, I could be wrong!), and HA are the only parties with some/all of the real facts of consignment, bidding, winning.

that is tasty! do you have another picture that's closer, I'd like to read the gag

Saw that Buckler NM splash, thought it was a very good price, too many irons in the first already to grab...nice score!!

I don't think there is any way to determine which pieces were shilled outside of the shillers stepping forward. So I want to see a list released from each auction house of ALL the pages consigned by this seller. This is a want list for authorities to legally compel if/when a plea deal is presented to Mike

Cross-posting this from the WEIRD HA RESULTS thread.

No. I know what I would pay and that's my limit. However, I'm more certain that ever that I'm likely to overpay vs. the "real" market. Actually, it just depends on who your are dealing with. Ethics and "fair play" do matter to some people still. Keep advertising that James, it's definitely valued-added in comparison.