And the reserves are in!

[tth2]

and YES it is butt ugly. on aesthetics alone I wouldn't pay $100 for it

It's Alfred E. Neuman. He's not SUPPOSED to be attractive.

 

I am amused by KK's insecurity, that he actually seems threatened by the fact that the biggest OA sale by far in this auction was a painting of a Mad magazine cover, when he should be celebrating the success of this major icon of Americana.

[tth2]

the stock market is down significantly. I don't need to write a text wall of crystal ball predictions to know it will have a short term effect on collectibles.

In and of itself, a down stock market doesn't mean a down comic market at all. As I once noted in a post, during the bear market of the 70s and early 80s (with unemployment over 10%), comics went up. Following the 87 crash, comics went up. During the early 90s recession, comics went up. During the tech bubble, comics went DOWN somewhat, but after the tech bubble crashed and we had a bear market from 2000-2003, comics went up (a lot).

 

Other factors may be at work that indicate "it's different this time", but I just wanted to clarify that a correlation between a down stock market and a down comic market just isn't substantiated by the facts.

[batman_fan]

the stock market is down significantly. I don't need to write a text wall of crystal ball predictions to know it will have a short term effect on collectibles.

In and of itself, a down stock market doesn't mean a down comic market at all. As I once noted in a post, during the bear market of the 70s and early 80s (with unemployment over 10%), comics went up. Following the 87 crash, comics went up. During the early 90s recession, comics went up. During the tech bubble, comics went DOWN somewhat, but after the tech bubble crashed and we had a bear market from 2000-2003, comics went up (a lot).

 

Other factors may be at work that indicate "it's different this time", but I just wanted to clarify that a correlation between a down stock market and a down comic market just isn't substantiated by the facts.

 

Actually, I think you have to do a lot of qualifying with your statements. During those times when comics went up, certain stuff went up and certain stuff went down. During all that time there were winners and losers. I can think of a lot of stuff that went up only to have a major crash. Mid and low grade Marvels and DCs actual went down.

[tth2]

the stock market is down significantly. I don't need to write a text wall of crystal ball predictions to know it will have a short term effect on collectibles.

In and of itself, a down stock market doesn't mean a down comic market at all. As I once noted in a post, during the bear market of the 70s and early 80s (with unemployment over 10%), comics went up. Following the 87 crash, comics went up. During the early 90s recession, comics went up. During the tech bubble, comics went DOWN somewhat, but after the tech bubble crashed and we had a bear market from 2000-2003, comics went up (a lot).

 

Other factors may be at work that indicate "it's different this time", but I just wanted to clarify that a correlation between a down stock market and a down comic market just isn't substantiated by the facts.

 

Actually, I think you have to do a lot of qualifying with your statements. During those times when comics went up, certain stuff went up and certain stuff went down. During all that time there were winners and losers. I can think of a lot of stuff that went up only to have a major crash. Mid and low grade Marvels and DCs actual went down.

Okay, I can definitely qualify my statements by clarifying that I'm only talking about books that were vintage at the time. So price movements of any books that were modern at the time aren't included in my assessment.

 

I'm not sure I agree with you about prices of mid and low grade Marvels and DCs going down during these periods. They definitely haven't gone up in value at the same rate as HG books, but maybe only recently (before the economic downturn) did they start going down in absolute terms. They went down with the general comic market in the late 90s, but of course as I pointed out that was during a huge stock market boom. As an example, I bought a bunch of mid-grade early SA Marvels from Gerry Ross in 1986 (some keys, some not keys), that with one exception all turned out to be restored when I slabbed them in 2002, but I still made a profit in absolute terms when I sold them in 2002. Obviously not a good return on an inflation-adjusted basis, although I think they would have performed okay if they hadn't been restored.

[Bronty]

the stock market is down significantly. I don't need to write a text wall of crystal ball predictions to know it will have a short term effect on collectibles.

In and of itself, a down stock market doesn't mean a down comic market at all. As I once noted in a post, during the bear market of the 70s and early 80s (with unemployment over 10%), comics went up. Following the 87 crash, comics went up. During the early 90s recession, comics went up. During the tech bubble, comics went DOWN somewhat, but after the tech bubble crashed and we had a bear market from 2000-2003, comics went up (a lot).

 

Other factors may be at work that indicate "it's different this time", but I just wanted to clarify that a correlation between a down stock market and a down comic market just isn't substantiated by the facts.

 

Actually, I think you have to do a lot of qualifying with your statements. During those times when comics went up, certain stuff went up and certain stuff went down. During all that time there were winners and losers. I can think of a lot of stuff that went up only to have a major crash. Mid and low grade Marvels and DCs actual went down.

Okay, I can definitely qualify my statements by clarifying that I'm only talking about books that were vintage at the time. So price movements of any books that were modern at the time aren't included in my assessment.

 

I'm not sure I agree with you about prices of mid and low grade Marvels and DCs going down during these periods. They definitely haven't gone up in value at the same rate as HG books, but maybe only recently (before the economic downturn) did they start going down in absolute terms. .

 

In real terms most books haven't really gone up much at all due to the tightening of grading standards over time and the erosion in the value of restored books. The "performance" of one's 1980s-bought "NM" daredevil 1, which is actually a 8.5 PLOD has not been anything to crow about given the time and risk involved. And it only gets worse for books which AREN'T keys.

[r1982rhoads]

Did anyone on the boards buy anything? Anyone get a good deal...?

[Bronty]

the stock market is down significantly. I don't need to write a text wall of crystal ball predictions to know it will have a short term effect on collectibles.

In and of itself, a down stock market doesn't mean a down comic market at all. As I once noted in a post, during the bear market of the 70s and early 80s (with unemployment over 10%), comics went up. Following the 87 crash, comics went up. During the early 90s recession, comics went up. During the tech bubble, comics went DOWN somewhat, but after the tech bubble crashed and we had a bear market from 2000-2003, comics went up (a lot).

 

Other factors may be at work that indicate "it's different this time", but I just wanted to clarify that a correlation between a down stock market and a down comic market just isn't substantiated by the facts.

 

Fair enough Tim. But I did say "collectibles" not "comics." - I think it stands to reason that with people feeling a little less wealthy there will be a bit less money chasing stuff. That being said, some stuff will go down, and some stuff will go up, same as it ever was. Whether or not it will specifically affect comics, or which comics, or how much, no one can pretend to know.

 

 

[Bronty]

and YES it is butt ugly. on aesthetics alone I wouldn't pay $100 for it

It's Alfred E. Neuman. He's not SUPPOSED to be attractive.

 

I am amused by KK's insecurity, that he actually seems threatened by the fact that the biggest OA sale by far in this auction was a painting of a Mad magazine cover, when he should be celebrating the success of this major icon of Americana.

 

You know, you're right that its a big success in a way for the art market, and I know its different strokes for different folks and all that........ but if I was going to buy a portrait of an ugly person on a Mad cover for $170k it would sure be #11 instead

 

But hey the purchase must have made someone happy, so good for them I suppose. Seems kinda loony to me though.

[jjonahjameson1]

. As an example, I bought a bunch of mid-grade early SA Marvels from Gerry Ross in 1986 (some keys, some not keys), that with one exception all turned out to be restored when I slabbed them in 2002, but I still made a profit in absolute terms when I sold them in 2002. Obviously not a good return on an inflation-adjusted basis, although I think they would have performed okay if they hadn't been restored.

 

Gerry Ross? Man, I haven't heard that name in a decade. If there was ever a dealer that ripped people off and belonged in jail...

 

If anyone has books purchased from Gerry Ross and has yet to get a restoration check on them, I'd suspect you may be in for a rude awakening when getting the book slabbed by CGC.

[tth2]

. As an example, I bought a bunch of mid-grade early SA Marvels from Gerry Ross in 1986 (some keys, some not keys), that with one exception all turned out to be restored when I slabbed them in 2002, but I still made a profit in absolute terms when I sold them in 2002. Obviously not a good return on an inflation-adjusted basis, although I think they would have performed okay if they hadn't been restored.

 

Gerry Ross? Man, I haven't heard that name in a decade. If there was ever a dealer that ripped people off and belonged in jail...

 

If anyone has books purchased from Gerry Ross and has yet to get a restoration check on them, I'd suspect you may be in for a rude awakening when getting the book slabbed by CGC.

That`s for sure.

[Nexus]

An article about the MAD cover auctions:

 

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081116/LIFE/811160338

 

Art from MAD magazine fetches nearly $750K

 

By The Associated Press

November 16, 2008 6:00 AM

 

The last batch of original art from MAD magazine's New York archives sold Friday for a combined total of nearly $750,000.

 

The combined $746,516 was more than double pre-sale estimates, said Greg Rohan, president of Dallas-based Heritage Auction Galleries.

 

The collection was mostly made up of covers featuring the grinning Alfred E. Neuman, including the first one drawn by the late Norman Mingo for MAD's issue No. 30 of December 1956, which sold for $203,150.

 

Chicago collector Michael Gidwitz was the winning bidder for the cover, which shows the gap-toothed icon as a "write-in candidate for president," saying "What — me worry?" as an elephant and donkey glare angrily at each other in the background.

 

A Grammy-nominated singer and songwriter who requested anonymity was the winning bidder of three other MAD art covers, Rohan said.

 

The paintings were consigned by DC Comics, publisher of MAD.

 

MAD was founded by William Gaines and Harvey Kurzman.

 

It became widely popular for its mix of zany, absurdist and irreverent humor — especially its devastating parodies of Hollywood films and satirical commentaries on pompous politicians and self-important celebrities.

[tth2]

Thanks for posting that, Felix.

 

The combined $746,516 was more than double pre-sale estimates, said Greg Rohan, president of Dallas-based Heritage Auction Galleries.

Surely this is impossible. If fine art auctions are badly missing their estimates, then the plebians dabbling in their chocolate box art MUST follow!

 

A Grammy-nominated singer and songwriter who requested anonymity was the winning bidder of three other MAD art covers, Rohan said.

Okay, this definitely is impossible. It's been well established that no celebs from the entertainment field ever buy comics or OA, and if they do, they never buy anything expensive. It's some kind of law of science or something.

[Mister Trent]

Thanks for posting that, Felix.

 

 

A Grammy-nominated singer and songwriter who requested anonymity was the winning bidder of three other MAD art covers, Rohan said.

Okay, this definitely is impossible. It's been well established that no celebs from the entertainment field ever buy comics or OA, and if they do, they never buy anything expensive. It's some kind of law of science or something.

 

Grant Geissman is in the music industry and is heavily into MAD and EC.

[tth2]

Thanks for posting that, Felix.

 

 

A Grammy-nominated singer and songwriter who requested anonymity was the winning bidder of three other MAD art covers, Rohan said.

Okay, this definitely is impossible. It's been well established that no celebs from the entertainment field ever buy comics or OA, and if they do, they never buy anything expensive. It's some kind of law of science or something.

 

Grant Geissman is in the music industry and is heavily into MAD and EC.

[Mister Trent]

Thanks for posting that, Felix.

 

 

A Grammy-nominated singer and songwriter who requested anonymity was the winning bidder of three other MAD art covers, Rohan said.

Okay, this definitely is impossible. It's been well established that no celebs from the entertainment field ever buy comics or OA, and if they do, they never buy anything expensive. It's some kind of law of science or something.

 

Grant Geissman is in the music industry and is heavily into MAD and EC.

 

 

I was concentrating too much on the statement concerning the singer/songwriter bit.