The prices some people are asking for O/A are Ridiculous!

[Khazano]

Haggling is not my favorite thing to do, but I am willing to try it. Still it is hard to figure out where to begin on a piece that sold for $7K in Heritage, and is now priced at 2X that by the dealer. It would be bad form to start the negotiations at 1/2 the asking price, no?

 

Sure, but if you know what it sold for on Heritage, you know what they paid for it. So, if it went for $7K and they are now asking $14K for it, you know where the "elbow room" is. Start with an offer of $8.5 or 9K. Sure, it might not be the price you get it at, but it is a place to start, where you know they will make a profit and you aren't paying double market value (or more).

 

Thats great advice and I usually follow a similar code.

[Galactus]

I must agree, given the state of the market as a whole at present, do some dealers believe that doubling the price of a piece just recently sold in an auction enviroment is a prudent thing to do, or are they just trying to manipulate prices even further? Sure some pieces sell for too little and therefore they are just marking them up to the going rate, but not all the time.

 

As an example I just got an e-mail from Romitaman about new pieces that he has added to his site, some of these were wins from the Feb Heritage auction for which the price has been roughly doubled.

 

http://www.romitaman.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=5682&Details=1&From=Room

http://www.romitaman.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=5679&Details=1&From=Room

http://www.romitaman.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=5681&Details=1&From=Room

 

http://comics.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=7002&Lot_No=92111&src=pr

http://comics.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=7002&Lot_No=92113&src=pr

http://comics.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=7002&Lot_No=92041&src=pr

 

Is this a case of dealers holding large amounts of invetory attempting to keep prices high, or are these the going rate for these kind of pieces ?

 

[malvin]

I am just speculating and don't know any real details, but Mike is not necessarily the winning heritage bidder. The winner could have sold it to him or gave it to him for consignment.

 

Malvin

[Galactus]

Thats something i hadn't considered.

 

 

[comix4fun]

I must agree, given the state of the market as a whole at present, do some dealers believe that doubling the price of a piece just recently sold in an auction enviroment is a prudent thing to do, or are they just trying to manipulate prices even further? Sure some pieces sell for too little and therefore they are just marking them up to the going rate, but not all the time.

 

As an example I just got an e-mail from Romitaman about new pieces that he has added to his site, some of these were wins from the Feb Heritage auction for which the price has been roughly doubled.

 

http://www.romitaman.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=5682&Details=1&From=Room

http://www.romitaman.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=5679&Details=1&From=Room

http://www.romitaman.com/GalleryPiece.asp?Piece=5681&Details=1&From=Room

 

http://comics.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=7002&Lot_No=92111&src=pr

http://comics.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=7002&Lot_No=92113&src=pr

http://comics.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=7002&Lot_No=92041&src=pr

 

Is this a case of dealers holding large amounts of invetory attempting to keep prices high, or are these the going rate for these kind of pieces ?

 

 

All three of those were considered "steals" in the heritage auction. There were several high value, high interest pieces around them in the auction that grabbed the cash. These pieces were there for the taking but only after buyers had blown their cash or while they were holding their cash for what was upcoming.

 

There were a bunch of pieces I personally would have loved to get but did a giant deal a week before the auction. So much prime stuff in one auction, some pieces were bound to suffer unjustly.

 

Without some of those factors holding down the auction results on a few select pieces I think you would have seen prices a lot closer to what Mike is asking.

 

C

[Claudio]

I think that auctions do not (necessarily) represent market value. I recently got a piece via auction that I would have paid double for if it were offered for sale on a dealer site. Auctions are a risk. You need to get TWO people willing to pay market value at that time in order to get the piece. However, if you get two people who are willing to pay "stoopid" money, you can hit the jackpot! I think these pieces are priced a little high but I am no expert on Silver Age art. I also think they went a little low at the auction.

 

So, I guess if you really want a piece, you better put forth your best effort if it comes to auction. If you don't love it, then it is okay when you see it come up for sale for double hammer price on a dealer site.

 

just my

[Khazano]

Remember folks, Mike is really easy to negotiate with and even easier too arrange a trade deal with...

[bocaratondefense]

 

So, I guess if you really want a piece, you better put forth your best effort if it comes to auction.

 

Is is safe to assume that on almost every piece we are competing against the Donnellys or Burkey?

 

Anyone who thought that price of comic art was going fall in line with the devaluation of other goods is going to be proven wrong, when we have dealers propping up the prices and not letting them fall below a certain level.

 

 

[Claudio]

If you lose to a Donnelly or a Burkey, consider yourself lucky. At least they offer it for resale (even if you have to bend over to get it). It could go into a black hole collection and you may never have the option to buy at ANY price.

 

The dealers can't prop up the mkt by themselves. Too few of them and too much oa...

 

 

[Galactus]

I agree with you in general, but certain dealers can and do prop up certain aspects of the art market, by purchasing most if not all pieces when they crop up, it just depends how much of a vested interest they have in doing so.

 

To say that dealers can influence market prices is something that should not be under stated. It is also true that any individual with enough money could influence certain aspects of the art market.

[Meeley Man]

I think that auctions do not (necessarily) represent market value. I recently got a piece via auction that I would have paid double for if it were offered for sale on a dealer site.

 

I have to disagree. Auction sites do tend to give you a better relfection of true market value, over a dealers site or other places. Because in a publicly open auction, it is the market itself (by way of the public who make it up) who are deciding the price, which is as it should be, not just one party, who is looking out for thier own interests.

 

Dealers who want to get into bidding on auctioned pieces are actually one of the reasons why prices on many pieces are so high. They influence and manipulate the true market value. The Donnelley's, of course, are the worst case scenario of this, but there are other dealers who do this on certain stuff, but are a bit less blatant in it.

 

"Market values" is just that: the value that the people who make up the market are willing to pay. Thus, dealers who buy from auctions, who then double the price (or more), with the interest of not just making a profit (because they could do so without raising the prices like that), but manipulating the market value, are one of the thorns to why an honest market value for OA will probably be very hard to attain. At least, not until the nostalgia-buying part of the market dies off (which probably won't be for another 30-40 years, at least).

[Nexus]

It's not like Burkey or any other dealer arbitrarily buys stuff at auctions and then immediately marks them up 2X (or more). Burkey is more plugged in to the market than most of us will ever be. He knows a bargain, and an opportunity, when he sees one.

 

Having said that, no one's going to have a 100% success rate. Where I think the market and values get propped up is when a dealer doesn't get their price, they don't lower it. Or let it ride on Ebay. Instead, orphan pieces just get traded amongst dealers...often with escalating values.

 

In the end, we've all gotta do our homework. Buying from dealers means you're always paying a markup...but it doesn't always mean you're overpaying.

 

 

[Galactus]

That is also true, and i suppose it depends on the dealer and their pricing structure, which i find is dictated by what artist or era they specialize in.

 

A little while back there was a MTIO cover by Perez being offered by Will Gabriel for $10,000 more than Romitaman offered it for a few months later, when he traded for it.

 

[Claudio]

I think that auctions do not (necessarily) represent market value. I recently got a piece via auction that I would have paid double for if it were offered for sale on a dealer site.

 

I have to disagree. Auction sites do tend to give you a better relfection of true market value, over a dealers site or other places. Because in a publicly open auction, it is the market itself (by way of the public who make it up) who are deciding the price, which is as it should be, not just one party, who is looking out for thier own interests.

 

I said auctions to not (necessarily) represent market value. So by disagreeing are you saying that they always do? Chris stated some good reasons why these may have been bargains. Also, these auctions closed the same weekend of Wondercon and Mega Con (I think). I do think that auctions can be very representative of values but they can also be way off. You just have to research.

 

Complaining about flippers can help (I know I am hesitant to buy from certain dealers because of what I have read on these boards) but I also accept they're here to stay and I won't worry too much about what others are doing. Like I said, I think it is better if "they" had my grail piece than if a black hole collector had it.

[bocaratondefense]

Like I said, I think it is better if "they" had my grail piece than if a black hole collector had it.

 

Why do you think it is better? If this is your holy grail piece, why don't you just bid a little stronger, so you do not have to pay double two months later?

 

 

[malvin]

"Value" is very hard to define. At the end of the day it's what you are willing to pay for it. What you value a page is always different from what someone else values it at.

 

Auctions are not necessarily "market value". All it represents is one bid increment above the 2nd highest bidder, amongst those who saw the auction that week (if it was ebay). In many ways, it is a liquidation price. I've said this before, for those of us that won auctions, we sometimes win it for alot less than our max.

 

In an alternate reality, and that page was not on ebay but instead sitting on a dealer or artist site for slightly below your max, would you buy it? Probably, so which is the market value?

 

In yet another tangent, you can argue that housing prices are not market value since they don't start at 99 cents with no reserve, but you would be wrong!

 

Malvin

[Claudio]

Like I said, I think it is better if "they" had my grail piece than if a black hole collector had it.

 

Why do you think it is better? If this is your holy grail piece, why don't you just bid a little stronger, so you do not have to pay double two months later?

 

 

If it was my grail and I didn't have the money to buy it at that moment, I would consider paying 2x in time payments later. Or maybe I could offer a trade. At least I would have a shot at it. just trying to look at the glass as "half-full".

 

[Meeley Man]

I said auctions to not (necessarily) represent market value. So by disagreeing are you saying that they always do? Chris stated some good reasons why these may have been bargains. Also, these auctions closed the same weekend of Wondercon and Mega Con (I think). I do think that auctions can be very representative of values but they can also be way off. You just have to research.

 

As far as figuring out a fair market value, and not just letting dealers buy it and double (or more) the price and calling THAT "market value?" Yes, I'd say public auctions ALWAYS give you a fair idea of market value.

 

As for the qulaifiers you noted, true enough that such things might keep an auction from going higher than it does. But then, there are people who will pay "stoopid money" for a car, well beyond the suggested retail price. That doesn't nullify the fact that the actual market value of the car is less than that. Just as dealers who buy a piece at auction and double (or more) the price, shouldn't be seen as the ones who are showing the "market value" of OA.

 

If you are asking me for a 100% foolproof way of gleening "market value," at this point, given how this peticualr system is allowed to work, I can't. But auction sites final price is as fair as anything could possibly be, at this point. Certainly way more fair that a dealer buying up stuff and exponentially raising it from what they paid.

 

Complaining about flippers can help (I know I am hesitant to buy from certain dealers because of what I have read on these boards) but I also accept they're here to stay and I won't worry too much about what others are doing. Like I said, I think it is better if "they" had my grail piece than if a black hole collector had it.

 

But if you validate the delaer (or flipper) by paying the price they are asking, knowing it is way above what a fair market value might be, you keep the problem going. You become an enabler to a system that keeps prices artifically high.

 

In any other consumer product line of business, if a business overcharges on the product it won't move. This is why some dealers hold on to peices for VERY long periods time. But rather then bring the price down to something more realistic, in terms of a fair market value, they keep the price up (or, as with the Donnelleys, continue to raise it higher over time). This creates an over-inflated value on the art, which is not representative of what it is actually worth. This is, in part, why the economy is in the tank. Over-inflated prices on stocks and securities, kept high by banks and lenders, which eventually came tumbling down like the house of cards it was. The same will happen to OA at some point. But as long as nostalgia drives collectors, not the desire for a more fair and reasoned marketplace, prices will continue to remain high, which is why, despite the poor economy we have, OA has been pretty much unaffected (and in some cases has gone up).

 

So, expect ridiculous prices to continue, because the dealers aren't going to stop doing it, as long as there are fools who will pay them to over-inflate the market value of OA. And good luck to us all, when this house of cards comes crashing down.

[Claudio]

If you are asking me for a 100% foolproof way of gleening "market value," at this point, given how this peticualr system is allowed to work, I can't.

I am not. I just asked one question for clarification. Market value is an illusion in my opinion.

 

But if you validate the delaer (or flipper) by paying the price they are asking, knowing it is way above what a fair market value might be, you keep the problem going. You become an enabler to a system that keeps prices artifically high.

If they have something I need, I'll pay it. If it isn't something I need, I'll pass. I don't care if I am an enabler if they can get me a piece I covet.

[Meeley Man]

Market value is an illusion in my opinion.

 

Well, you can believe as you like. It doesn't invalidate the fact that there IS one.

 

If they have something I need, I'll pay it.

 

A mistaken fallacy: OA is not a necessity.

 

I don't care if I am an enabler if they can get me a piece I covet.

 

Which, as I said and this kind of thinking shows, is why the dealers get away with prices that are over-inflated on OA. Thank you for proving my point. I appreciate that.