sfilosa

Can you link to your CAF gallery? I would like to see your collection before adding a comment. Thanks.

There is no doubt that a lot of sales are really like kind exchanges (and that's what we will tell the IRS ). But I'm not sure it would make sense to go through Heritage as they are going to get a cut. Could show up more when CAF reports a "dealer sale" (at list price), but states it could have been sold for less or part trade.

My most expensive (excluding complete stories) purchase (so far): In my mind, the most incredible (from a detailed painting point of view) Savage Sword of Conan cover. There are other ones that are more interesting and Conanesque, but the talent of the artist can not be denied (you could try, but you would be lying).

Glen and Mike, definitely enjoy your post Heritage show. Quick thought is maybe each of you pick three or four pieces that might not have been top dollar sellers but you want to comment on (I know you did a little bit of that). Maybe even give some good insight why something might be a good buy or an anomaly price, or whatever. I say that for a reason; I looked back at a few of the last Heritage Auctions, and around 90% or more of the top selling pieces, never show up in anyone's CAF gallery. I would bet a lot more of the lesser price pieces do. And since this is a CAF show, I would think some of us would like to hear your unapologetic opinions on our purchases (well, maybe). Lastly, I was the underbidder on the Schomburg Invaders page. Probably drove the price up a few grand (seemed that way). While it really only had one good panel, the fact that there are only seven comic art pages by Schomburg after 1951, makes it a rarity that in my mind, outweighs a ton of art (even from that time). Plenty of average covers go for more than that. I kind of like the idea of owning pieces that are rare. Unfortunately, this will not be one of those.

Look under Miscellaneous. Lots more comic art (just not classified yet).

If you own a home, ask your agent. I get mine from a different company then who insures my home, but they also insure other items (such as jewelry) on the same policy as my art. I'm paying around a little more than 1/2 percent of the value of my collection on an annual basis. One, if you have an issue, you have your agent to help you on the claim and two, the agent can rebid it every year if necessary.

10 underbidder is a lot. Would like to know some of those if you care to share. I picked up a Michael Kaluta Lucifer cover. Wanted something from him and this is the time to buy (lots of options). He didn't leave much empty space on the cover .Paid more than I thought it would go for, but I had three pieces I was very interested and when you don't get the first two, the "bid again " has a lot of influence.

He did. It's a painting, therefore not really comic art. I actually remember buying that guide when it came out and it is a great cover. And he did other comic paintings also, but once again not really comic art (e.g. black and white) and definitely not for a story. Either way, his art is extremely rare to find.

Some quick thoughts on day two (which I did not win anything, ahhhhh). I will not be holding back my opinion but feel free to disagree with me. *George Perez complete book Avengers #34 went for $38k+. Thought that was very high. Cover was useless, so assume that should have gone for $4k by itself (honestly have no idea), that mean 38 pages went for $34k (or $895 per page). Less than a year ago the complete story (less cover) for #33 sold on ComicLink for $418 a page. Half of the pages were only Perez layouts, but from a per page the HA interior book sold for more than double. I gave up on this one pretty quickly in the auction. *Invaders Annual #1 page ten. Top piece I wanted and was the underbidder. I actually thought I won, must have taken my eyes off the screen for a few seconds, but that was my top amount as I had already clicked "Disable Live Bidding". Sold for $15.6k. I would be more disappointed but I have spent a lot over the past month (can't own them all). For those who don't know what this page is, Alex Schomburg did a lot of the classic Timely covers. He stop drawing Comic Book Art (except recreation type paintings) in 1951 except one cover and six pages for this issue. Therefore, this was a very "rare piece". HA has never sold any of the other pages, so there was no price history to know what this should have gone for. Obviously, since I was the underbidder, I feel that the price was about right, but who knows what this might sell for ten years from now (more or less). *Boris Vallejo Gryphon Painting sold for $14.4k (thought that was high). I like a lot of Boris' work (and own several nice pieces). I had exactly 0.0000000% interest in this piece. Gryphon looked kind of cool but that is the most "manly" looking lady I have ever seen in a Boris piece. Funny is that was the piece they had behind the auctioneer, but I think there are hundreds of better Boris' pieces. And it was 1991, so it wasn't from anywhere close to his peak period (70's). *Daredevil #10 page 11 Bob Powell and Wally Wood sold for $40.8k. That's what most of these pages go for. That said, while I like the idea of owning one of these one day, I don't see any "Wally Wood" in the art. They are extremely dull (feels more like DC art from the time than Marvel). Probably because Colan took over a year later, most early DD art seems very dull. Hopefully, I will win one or two pieces on day three. If not, there are plenty of other auctions coming down the pike.

Frazetta - Not even close to a record!!!!!

The real truth is because of leasing, almost anyone can afford a much nicer car than they can truly afford. I have a whole lease car analysis spreadsheet that I do before I buy/lease my next car(s), but in general, a lease lets you spread out the car costs over a longer period of time than purchasing a car. Meaning that if you would buy a car and usually pay it off in 5-6 years, a lease might feel like you are paying it off over 8-9. A lot has to do with the residual value that car companies "pretend" their cars will have at the end of the lease, but also with the idea that when they "lease" a car, it's considered "sold". Therefore, if you have customers that do 36 months leases, but would own a car for nine years, they can say they sold 3 cars under the lease scenario vs one sale.

As with any "investment" (regardless if you are buying specifically for an investment or not), there is a price where it makes sense to sell. Pretty much the only "tangible" thing in life not for sale is our family/friends. And some of us probably wish we could sell off some family members.

They got the order of my collecting down pat. Unfortunately, not sure I will make it to the Frazetta stage. While I could afford a pretty nice sketch, I would want a pretty good painting and that ain't happening anytime soon.

Let's not kid ourselves. If we thought for a minute that we couldn't sell what we bought for at least something close to what we paid for it (maybe lose 10-20% if we are in a rush), almost none of us would drop 5 figures on any art. I justify every purchase by saying I'm just converting one investment into another. Being married, I could not justify spending $10k on a piece of art if I thought it would depreciate to zero at some point in time. But I can buy a Mercedes Benz and know it will depreciate to zero at some point. But my MB gets me to work and other places so I justify the luxury because it is something I want. And history has proven that in most cases, the art we buy will go up in value. If over a 20-30 year period, the prices were decreasing, there would be a lot less collectors, even though we could afford to own a lot more art.

Time to bump. I have my eye on three or four things I would really like to own for my collection. Probably another 10 items that at the right price, I could be interested in (and yes, they are still in that "right price range" which means nothing at this time).

Probably throwing gas on a fire, but if anyone looks at most (not all) the complete stories collectors have from the past 20 years, I would say they are INCOMPLETE!!!! Why are they incomplete? Because most don't have the word balloon at all. Clearly, when the "story" was told, the words were a very important part of the story. Also, I can argue that the coloring process was also meant to be a significant part of the art, yet I don't think many "completionist" are searching for the color guides. An ACTUAL comic book is the best representation of what the entire comic book was meant to be/say/convey, etc. Not the "unfinished art" which is what B&W ink art really is (except for B&W comic magazines).

We had this discussion when I showed my SSOC #164 cover and you mentioned you didn't buy it and bought "more profitable" items. For me, I'm mostly a Comic Art Collector. That is why my house is full of painting (colored art). I have plenty of B&W inked comic art, but in almost all cases, the piece has artistic value to me. Even though I want to collected SSOC covers, I have passed on a lot more than I have because they didn't strike me as "artistic" enough. Now in the case of B&W inked art, I try to buy pieces that I like visually and represent the artist's unique talent. One reason I don't own a lot of John or Sal Buscema art (very, very popular 60-70's artist, right in my target time frame), is simple, I just don't see enough "uniqueness" to their art. I can't really identify them like I can with Adams, Wrightson, Colan, Kirby, etc. Also, it is the REASON I don't own any COVERS that have stats on them (e.g. any cover I own is fairly modern). Simply put, I value the ART, whereas covers take up 1/3 of the page with Titles/Words (which are mostly stats anyway). To me, they distract from the art. I admit, as a Comic Book Collector first (no more), they have nostalgic appeal, but in general I would be paying grossly more than for an "artistic" panel page to own 2/3 art and 1/3 stats. Not worth it to me at this time. Plus, as someone who has visited many of the most famous museums in the world (Louvre, Vatican, Hermitage, etc.), I just don't remember any of the art with big writing on them. But back to the topic of this thread, I don't have any opinion on someone who 1) wants to own a complete story or 2) wants to buy a complete story and break it up. As I said before, I'm interested in buying a complete story in the most recent Heritage Auction (which there are a lot this time). But assume I thought there were three incredibly "artistic" pages, and the other say 17 pages I would never want to purchase. Should I keep the whole book intact, to "preserve" history? It's not like I'm going to burn the 17 pages, and let's be real, in my life, I don't foresee this complete story being put in a museum. At best, it is sold to another collector and he keeps in his room for enjoy. And since Heritage already has high quality scans of all the pages, that's the best the rest of the world would get to enjoy if the story stays together or not.

Not going to make a long rant but first and foremost, "we are collectors". We are not buying to conserve the art form, I have no altruism to my collection (e.g. I want buy all this art to give to a museum one day). When I die, my collection will already be sold or my wife/kids will sell. My wife and I have that discussion every day a new piece of art arrives, as in "when I die, you can sell these and hopefully they will be worth more than I paid" and she responds, "and when will that be". That said, I did buy my first whole story (7-page EC Jack Davis story) just a few months ago, and I don't think I would ever consider splitting it up. I am looking at buying another whole story in an Heritage Auction, and before I figure out how much to pay, I will need to figure out if I want to split it up or keep it whole. If I break it up and can sell most of it and keep a few pages for free, that would be great. But I know I will feel bad breaking it up. I have a few days to figure this out!

First line is so true. Not calling you out, but revisionist history happens all the time. Ask someone who says they bought lots Amazon stock back in the late 90's instead of AOL stock and they can make up any story that makes them seem like a genius. They analyzed all the on-line sellers at the time and thought Amazon had the best model. But it could have been that they read a very bullish article one day about Amazon, bought the stock and the rest is history. If they read another article that day that said Amazon will never make it, they don't buy. I do think your buy four, sell three and keep the fourth for free is ALWAYS a good model.

Awesome piece (I should know)!!! Glad it made it to you safe and sound. It really is a stunning piece and nice size also (that's not always conveyed in a picture). Worse yet is when you see something you like and read that is 5" by 7", and you feel like you should be collecting stamps. Now you are hooked and going to want more!!!!

Both your points are spot on. That will be the topic of my thread, color vs. line art. And yes, what you bought was way better of a return. I would guess a lot of art one could have bought had a better return, but not everything. Older DC art has lagged tremendously. Obviously I didn't know your specifics, but as you probably know, it is call opportunity costs. That said, based on your story, you didn't consciously say, "I don't want these paintings because I think X-Men art will be a better investment". You basically couldn't get the deal for the Norem paintings worked out, didn't buy them and bought something else (which is what happens). Sometimes that works out to your advantage and sometimes not. And yes, you have to buy what you love!!!

One thing that I like about his art (I only have one piece) is that he paints bigger than most others. So if you want something to fill your wall, more bang for your buck. Still, he is definitely hit or miss. Price per square inch, GOOD, quality, not always there.

Cool story. $2k sounds like around the right price in 2002. I'm guessing whatever art you bought increased proportionately to this one. I am going to start a thread at some point on this topic, but I do feel that this type of art is undervalued. I say that because Frazetta's are incredibly expensive (sketches going for $70k and crappy paintings for $300k or more), yet there is no "second tier" artist getting anywhere near that price. Their best art is not getting what his worst art gets in general. At some point, some of the second tier artist's best work will break open on pricing.

Was able to buy this from a CAF member after making it known that if he ever wanted to sell, I was a buyer. After three years, I've add another nice piece to my collection. Any other collectors who might have SSOC covers they want to sell, please email me at sfilosa@aol.com.

You got the best deal for sure. Very nice pages. I'm not upset at all that I sold them for what I did. I will say stressing about shipping is just a pain. I don't think I have missed one bit of sleep because I thought I could have sold something for more, but I definitely lose thinking about how I'm going to ship, pack, when to go to the mailing place, etc. And my shipping costs are always a lot more than I expect. Plus, at least if you sell in an auction where you feel they get full value (basically ComicLink or Heritage), the price it sells for is market. It is what it is. Different note - I thought the Barry Smith Conan page went for a pretty hefty amount as I had perceived some weakest (or lack or price increases) on some of his Conan work. $13.4k for a really good page, but a lot of panels and him just fighting a guard. Plus one of the panels was a cut-out and replaced (hate the CL doesn't mention that at all). Once again, strong auction all around.