otherworldsj33

Very spooktacular.

I would be surprised to see ot go more then the high '80;s, low '90's. Bu then again, I am the guy who thought the GL 76 would top out at around 300K.

1. Cap #68 cover - $66,000 2. DD 165 splash - $27,000 3. Swamp Thing #6 cover - $54,500 4. ROTJ cvr by Sinkw - $25,000 5. C, Ware story - $23,500 6. Spidey #259 cover - $20,500 7.Mike Zeck Puns. cover - $18,000 8. Defenders 4 cover - $21,500 9. JLA #1 page - $14, 500 10. Preacher Dillon page - $2,900 Includes BP.

No cut off is the best way to go.

B&B 79, because it started a new look for Batman. Also, the coloring does not bother me much either in the reprints.

Good advice. Good OP idea,

The lower middle panel of the Cap page looks like a typical Spider-man pose.

Good thread. Happy Birthday JR ! Many more and blessings to you.

I think 1970-75 was among the most fertile creative periods at Marvel. Tons of great storylines (e.g., The Kree-Skrull War, cosmic Starlin, Death of Gwen Stacy/Green Goblin, Red Nails, etc.) and new characters (Wolverine, new X-Men, Werewolf by Night, Conan, Red Sonja, Punisher, Blade, Moon Knight, Shang-Chi, Dracula, etc.) were introduced during this period, while many talented creators (Starlin, Gerber, Englehart, etc.) joined the Bullpen during these years. When people here say that the '70s sucked for comics, I have to believe they mean primarily 1976-1979, because 1970-75 rocked! And not just at Marvel - Batman was revitalized and recovered from the hangover from the campy TV show over at DC, GL/GA ushered in a new realism, Warren was in its prime and comic magazines across the various publishers were never bigger or better... I'd rank my personal favorite 5-year periods in comics (across all publishers) since the release of FF #1 in this order (note that I am not really a fan of the early Silver Age or the Golden Age outside of the EC titles - I respect it tremendously, but it's not my bag when it comes to reading comics): 1. 1981-1985 2. 1971-1975 3. 1986-1990 4. 1966-1970 5. 2001-2005 6. 2011-2016 7. 1976-1980 8. 1961-1965 9. 1996-2000 10.1991-1995 I know this is personal favorite list, but 1976 to 1980 (probably the worst 5 year creative period ever - except for the X-Men, the short Eng.- Rogers Detective run, HTD, and Cerebus, it was a wasteland ) beats out 1961 to 1965 ?? Anyway, my personal favorites: 1. 1965 to 1969 2. 1970 to 1974 3. 1960 to 1964 4. 1985 to 1989 5. 1950 to 1954 6. 1940 to 1944 7. 1980 to 1984 8. 1935 to 1939 9. 1955 to 1959 10.1976 to 1980

The last word of your post summed it up as good as one can. Excellent observation. It's soulless

Dealers, auction houses, and collectors. I bet Heritage with all their neatly stored and disseminated information base has a better idea then any one of us has as to what the future of the hobby may look like. Maybe the Metro guys too. And others of course. I have not been around much lately so I really have no accurate idea. Is there any one person, or a group out there who can compare notes and come up with fairly accurate population numbers, age demographics, financial wealth and collecting habits information as to what the OA hobby currently looks like? Rather then just focusing the equation solely on longer term established older collectors who may be liquidating in the next 15 years, we'd get a much better idea of who may be coming up to replace them. And a more pinpoint prediction of how this may play out. Although after saying all that, it does seem as if Genes forecast is more true then not.

If I wanted a OA page for a modern comic that was digital, I would see if I could get the artist to draw and ink it for me on traditional art board. And I would ask him to please put the title, issue number and page number, and date he drew the page for me along with his signature on the back. At the rate I read digital comics, that may never happen, not even once. Value wise, I think about 99.5 % of modern art will never have much relative worth. I think you have only a slightly worse chance of getting rich with the lottery then with buying modern art. Miller said some years back, (I think it was in 1994?) that the current comics were retro with a nose ring. Then most modern OA is retread with a cane. As far as the better stuff, the prime A/A+ GA/SA/BA art, and the collectors that own it, I have a question. Collectors now that are in their mid 40's or older. Quite a few are going to liquidate in the next 10, 15 years. Lets say, just throwing out an arbitrary year, that in 2027 your getting ready to sell. In the previous 10 years there has been a steady stream of Ethan Roberts (RIP) like collections coming to market every auction. Either because of death or cash out. You have seen prices on a lot of stuff soften and even crash in some cases. But maybe about 25% to 50% of your collection has not only held value but has increased. Some pieces have increased a lot. Some not what you expected. The other 50% to 75% has lost value. In some cases a great deal. Also, you have witnessed a slowing down in the last year of two of increases in value of even the better OA stuff. Maybe because of all the great OA coming to market the last 10 years. Maybe also because of the economy. And still maybe because there are less collectors out there buying the stuff. And who is left has purchased a lot of OA that's been available the last 10 years. So what do you do? Hold on longer? Give instructions to your kids what to do after you die? Sell at whatever the market will bear? Donate the better stuff to a Museum, get a tax credit. Decide that if you can't sell it at a stunning profit, you'd rather just crayola it in, frame it and hang it up, it'll stay there on wall til the day you die?

I am with you Gene on the high end B+/A/ A+ material. Historic and note worthy art is going to escalate. I think that market will be less dependent on us rapid core of OA lover and collectors. Your going to have investors and out of hobby coming into that segment in increasing numbers. So yeah, I would be very surprised if it did not continually increase in value, soaring to many multiples of today's (in my mind)somewhat crazy numbers. That leaves what, about another 95% of the market that may see steady decreases in prices as time goes on? We already know that about, (name your figure; mine is around 95), of everything produced in entertainment is mediocre and worse. Then we are looking at a decline of value of the majority of OA out there in the future. Maybe that's a good thing. The prices I see at auctions for some mid to late 70's, early 80's Marvel stuff, by 2nd and 3rd tier artists just don't seem sustainable to me. But I am probably the last guy to pay attention to. Almost 10 years ago I though the press and grade game and resub resub resub, etc., would be the ruination of many a comic book value. I said back then by 2013 or so we'll see it's impact. We obviously never did. I still think it is insane to pay tens of thousands and even hundreds of thousands more for a .2 uptick in a grade, especially for pressed altered books. But I could not have been more wrong. For now at least. Maybe for ever.

...is modern OA going to be as widely collected in the future as BA and SA is now? Most people over about 35 were limited in what they could be exposed to. The internet, as we know it today , did not really arrive until around 1996 or so. So anyone in the 35 and above age group were limited as kids as to what was available. It was not much different since the early '50's when young boys and girls were introduced to TV, until just about the end of the century. We had TV, radio, movies, magazines, books, and comics. Board games, outside play (do kids do that anymore?) professional sports. You get the idea. Now video games, the internet - computers, inter active stuff here or soon on its way. Cell phones. Netflix. Cable with 300 channels. The options are stunning. So with all the scattering of kids and young adults attention, what does that mean for the hobby 15, 20 years out? I don't know. Not sure. After all, the mania surrounding super hero movies seems to have catapulted them to increased popularity. Will that offset it?

I think your claim that Heritage is "shaking down" its clients and customers is a bit unfair. You're inferring that they are somehow in cahoots with the Kirby family. I think it's clear that the last thing an auction house would want is to have a major segment of a market closed off to them or limit it in any way. This is relatively new ground being covered here and they appear to be taking a prudent approach of working with the family and their clients and waiting to see how things turn out. Maybe it will pattern into the new norm. With the way society is generally heading I would bot be surprised, even if I think it is unjust and can't see it gaining any serious traction in the long term.

Excellent points Voodu. Some intelligent and provoking stuff that goes beyond the minutia to the crux of it. I'll add my 1.5 cents. I believe that at it's core, ownership of just about anything is a perversion of God's --- (or nature or whatever your belief for those that may not believe in God or have another view - it is not my intention to insult anyone or veer this discussion into religion or dig a rabbit hole, although the ownership subject in itself may be a deep one) --- original intent of the ideal manner in which to live. The world system of the creation of wealth and class, abundance and poverty, (excessive) pride of ownership, or self identification with a object to the level of it being unhealthy. It can push the tendency to focus on objects and competition, where imho it should be relational and spiritual. .

Posted by Eric Settings "We as art collectors, all, have to realize this isn't ultimately about the Kirby family or their greed/justice. It's about what happens if this ever does see the court, and what the outcome of such a property case would be. I'm thinking that at least in the short term we won't see such a case, and are going to see compliance and a staler market for that art, rather than getting any kind of decision that would setting things once and for all." It is true what your saying about the ultimate realization, practically speaking. And yes, outside of our little OA collector group, the knee jerk of the general public may initially be to take the side of Kirby's family. Not for sure, but maybe. But I don't care much what the general public thinks about this. My focus lies among us collectors. We are in the know and have the art. Thirty or more years after the fact? With no paper trails in many cases. Convoluted stories and evidence? A broad broom with no regard to the individuals claim of from whom they purchased the art? Lets look at some of the negatives. A black market is going to develop. Less taxes paid (although most of us, me included, don't really care about that). Less financial fluidity for many collectors who have Kirby art. Impaired enjoyment of our hobby. Loss of good will for the Kirby family. You know, if the moral and legal grounds were something more concrete, I say the Kirby family should go for it. But they are almost abstract and seem to scream greed and bullying. Who the lawyer is does matter to me. People often judge you by the company you keep, and more times then not, rightly so. Also a tithe it is absolutely not. I know what tithing is, This is not it. And yes, it may sound logical and make good business sense because of the headaches involved to just simply give in to the extortionist demands. That is debatable by the way. Yet it may make better business sense to fight this due to precedence issues. Still, even if it did make good business sense to just capitulate, and I am not sure it does, you can't always take the human element out f it. There are a lot of sharp guys in this hobby, with money, and who are competitive and who don't like being bullied around who will challenge this. I have no doubt of that in my mind a court case will come to be, if push comes to shove. With all these circumstances, its a shakedown, plain and simple. I am of a open mind, if someone can educate me why I am wrong to think that, tell me. I have heard no arguments that even come close at his time though.

Good info B.

The thing is Joe... there's really no conflict in this instance between the spirit of the law and my understanding of the letter of the law. Either one would to my understanding tell them to take a short hike on a long pier and they are just trying to strong-arm their way into more money... is sure how it looks on the surface. I agree.

BTW, knowing the personalities of some of the dealers and maybe even a few of the big name auction houses out there, the Kirby family can expect to go to court over this. More bad press for your name, if anyone from or connected with the Kirby family is reading this, sounds like your lawyer is maybe going to make more money then you in this. Don't let him sell you on a bill of goods. Did you all get a second and even third legal opinion? I would seriously think twice before going ahead with this if I was you. Your 1 and 0 now. Listen to the Beatles. Let it be.

Exactly. Its not the legal issue here, but the human issue. It just feels inherently wrong, what they are doing. In fact beyond the outcome of any potential legal case in this matter, and the general reasons why a court came to its decision, I don't care much about the legalities. It's just not the way to go. The spirit of the law and the letter of law are two very different issues from my perspective.

Pure speculation: artificial scarcity would very much raise the value (price realized) for any art that was auctioned "in the clear". Wanna guess who's got some o' dat? Sidebar: How valuable the foresight that Jim Lee had to divest of his Kirby over the last several years? (Or does he yet have more held back?) And meanwhile Erik Larsen...still sitting on his hoard, right? Not that it was coming to market, but definitely not now. Who knows? It may get them some short term smallish gains, but in the big picture the loss of the goodwill of the community toward them will more then offset that. Meanwhile does anyone truly believe that a underground market for his art won't further develop? That absolutely all Kirby art is now stuck in place? agreed especially re loss of goodwill Why would any Kirby aside from Jack and Roz care what The Hobby thinks of them? I mean some may, but in the abstract "why"? Well if your all about money, you usually don't care what people think about you or your greedy nature, because, well, what the heck, who needs people, ya got money.

Pure speculation: artificial scarcity would very much raise the value (price realized) for any art that was auctioned "in the clear". Wanna guess who's got some o' dat? Sidebar: How valuable the foresight that Jim Lee had to divest of his Kirby over the last several years? (Or does he yet have more held back?) And meanwhile Erik Larsen...still sitting on his hoard, right? Not that it was coming to market, but definitely not now. Who knows? It may get them some short term smallish gains, but in the big picture the loss of the goodwill of the community toward them will more then offset that. Meanwhile does anyone truly believe that a underground market for his art won't further develop? That absolutely all Kirby art is now stuck in place?

For the Kirby family the best positive spin I can think of to put on this is that the family took a vote and the greedy or weak minded members won narrowly over the more altruistic kin folk.

The family just got a s h i t load of money and now they want to go after original art that has been out there for at least 30 years (when some of the art was returned to Jack). They now have the money to throw at lawyers to lean on sellers and auction houses. I bet Marc Toberoff is behind this. Again, I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying. People seem to have come out throwing rocks, judging that the family has 'gotten enough' and should be done with it all. Who are we to say? This track doesn't look like one I'd personally go down were I in their shoes, but I also don't know the whole story or what their end aims are. You and your family couldn't live on 40 or 50 million? As much as comic art has escalated, I doubt there are very many people in our hobby who are worth even close to that. Even most of the more fortunate collectors have collections worth probably less then 5 million, way less in most cases. Have some grace, and let it go. The time is past. It smacks of a legal shake down and pure greed to almost all of us. In this matter, it makes Adams look good, which is hard to do. Again, I'm not looking for an argument - I'm just stating my surprise at the language being used when no one really even knows what is happening. As best I can tell, all of this stems from gossip and one email from an auction house at the moment. Time will open this up and the facts will come out, then people can draw actual conclusions. It's not gossip. What has been stated here on these boards is really happening.