X-Men2 Splash

[Unca Ben]

This has been a very interesting thread.

[romitaman]

Just for the record....the Kirby splash to x-men 2...i bought it from jon mankuta directly this past summer....i put it on comic connect auction as Vincent asked me to consign it as he felt it could sell to some art collectors he knew.......it didnt meet reserve there......but i sold it for all cash this past week and for alot more than the high bid in comic connect, to a high end collector privately!

 

i would have been happy to post here what it sold for but he asked me to please keep the all cash sale private.

 

but needless to say..i'm VERY happy with what I got for it.

 

Mike Burkey

 

www.romitaman.com

 

PS...i jsut got in a KILLER Kirby Hulk 4 page featuring the Hulk's origin retold, as well as a great Kirby Fantastic Four #3 all out battle page with The Thing. Mr. Fantastic and Invisible Girl battling the Miracleman throughout!

 

These will be posting shortly on my website with several other goodies, so stay tuned folks, and happy holidays to everyone!

[Galactus]

Uhm Mike, someone should also remind Comic Connect that the piece has sold. Because it's still on their site as "offers" or a buy-it-now for $100K

 

 

[Unca Ben]

Just for the record....the Kirby splash to x-men 2...i bought it from jon mankuta directly this past summer....i put it on comic connect auction as Vincent asked me to consign it as he felt it could sell to some art collectors he knew.......it didnt meet reserve there......but i sold it for all cash this past week and for alot more than the high bid in comic connect, to a high end collector privately!

 

i would have been happy to post here what it sold for but he asked me to please keep the all cash sale private.

 

but needless to say..i'm VERY happy with what I got for it.

 

Mike Burkey

 

www.romitaman.com

 

PS...i jsut got in a KILLER Kirby Hulk 4 page featuring the Hulk's origin retold, as well as a great Kirby Fantastic Four #3 all out battle page with The Thing. Mr. Fantastic and Invisible Girl battling the Miracleman throughout!

 

These will be posting shortly on my website with several other goodies, so stay tuned folks, and happy holidays to everyone!

So this past summer means the summer of 2010? I'm confused, because this thread started in the summer of 2009, when it was stated you had purchased it back then.

It's an awesome splash, by the way, sure wish I had the means to own it!!! I'm sure the new owner is thrilled; I would be!!!

[tth2]

Just for the record....the Kirby splash to x-men 2...i bought it from jon mankuta directly this past summer....i put it on comic connect auction as Vincent asked me to consign it as he felt it could sell to some art collectors he knew.......it didnt meet reserve there......but i sold it for all cash this past week and for alot more than the high bid in comic connect, to a high end collector privately!

 

i would have been happy to post here what it sold for but he asked me to please keep the all cash sale private.

 

but needless to say..i'm VERY happy with what I got for it.

 

Mike Burkey

 

www.romitaman.com

 

PS...i jsut got in a KILLER Kirby Hulk 4 page featuring the Hulk's origin retold, as well as a great Kirby Fantastic Four #3 all out battle page with The Thing. Mr. Fantastic and Invisible Girl battling the Miracleman throughout!

 

These will be posting shortly on my website with several other goodies, so stay tuned folks, and happy holidays to everyone!

So this past summer means the summer of 2010? I'm confused, because this thread started in the summer of 2009, when it was stated you had purchased it back then.

[tth2]

Just for the record....the Kirby splash to x-men 2...i bought it from jon mankuta directly this past summer

 

From July 2009:

 

Actually Felix, I beg to differ...as the former owner of this splash, I can say it has NOT been "shopped to every BSD", there were about 3 people offered the piece at a MUCH higher all-cash amount before I worked out a massive art deal with the current owner (Burkey).

 

Wow, I heard that Mike does not own this piece, that it's on consignment

 

Well Felix, as usual, you have the wrong info (you seem to do this a lot dude...)

 

And you're saying that Mike OWNS the piece 100%?

 

To call Burkey basically an insufficiently_thoughtful_person for aquiring one of the nicest image splashes of Jack Kirby art from one of the most important silver age titles in pop culture is just you showing ignorance toward silver-age art...

 

All this thread was is Clem pointing out that Burkey now has my former splash and how nice it is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[clemso]

Just for the record....the Kirby splash to x-men 2...i bought it from jon mankuta directly this past summer

 

From July 2009:

 

Actually Felix, I beg to differ...as the former owner of this splash, I can say it has NOT been "shopped to every BSD", there were about 3 people offered the piece at a MUCH higher all-cash amount before I worked out a massive art deal with the current owner (Burkey).

 

Wow, I heard that Mike does not own this piece, that it's on consignment

 

Well Felix, as usual, you have the wrong info (you seem to do this a lot dude...)

 

And you're saying that Mike OWNS the piece 100%?

 

To call Burkey basically an insufficiently_thoughtful_person for aquiring one of the nicest image splashes of Jack Kirby art from one of the most important silver age titles in pop culture is just you showing ignorance toward silver-age art...

 

All this thread was is Clem pointing out that Burkey now has my former splash and how nice it is.

 

 

 

 

 

 

And it still is in my eyes , regardless of value/perceived value. The composition is just perfect.

[tth2]

Whoops, forgot this post from Hari on July 15, 2009 forwarding a post straight from the horse`s mouth:

 

Thought I'd cut and paste this response from Mike Burkey, for what it's worth. ...

 

"I've been reading with amusement about the X-Men 2 splash controversy...

I didn't want to chime in as I felt the free publicity was good for it!

 

but rest assured I am the proud owner of that X-Men #2 splash....

 

 

[bocaratondefense]

Ownership issues aside, that is still a great looking splash, and $72,000 does not seems unreasonable at all. Mike says it sold for "alot more" than $72,000, so who knows what that really means.

 

 

 

 

[Nexus]

Ownership issues aside, that is still a great looking splash, and $72,000 does not seems unreasonable at all. Mike says it sold for "alot more" than $72,000, so who knows what that really means.

 

I don't know what that means, either. It does seem odd that the piece would not meet reserve at $72K and then immediately sell after for "alot more". It couldn't have been more than $105K, which is what it was ultimately discounted to on the Romitaman website for months prior to showing up for auction on Comic Connect. If it did sell post auction, then most likely for less than $105K. What it really means is that $150K was too much to begin with, and if Mike is "VERY happy" with the "all cash" amount he ended up getting, then everyone take note: Start your negotiations at no less than 1/3 off!

 

But why "ownership issues aside"? That's the very heart of this matter. No one's saying the art isn't nice...that's never been in dispute.

 

As to why the ownership issue is key here, Lambo put it best in this thread last year (bold mine). The first time, in reply to the "former owner":

 

Seriously Lambert, I'm not repeating this again and again and again...it's Mike's piece now...deals were done...the thread got out of hand when certain people made accusations and dove into what was a private deal between Mike and I...simple answer...feel free to ask me every 15 minutes in person at the con if you wish, maybe I'll trade back for it by then...

And it also bears the question of what difference did it ever make WHO owns it now and who cares? Whatever deal was worked between Burkey and I is our biz...

 

Sure Jon, I'll be happy to discuss this with you at any con. You may or may not know, I'm in the NYC area so next time, you're in the area, let me know. I am married with children so we'll have to meet at a Starbucks rather than your usual hangouts! And no, there are no topless Starbucks, even in NYC.

Regarding the question of what difference does it make, you came into this thread to refute some of the valuations being made online. So you realize that it's an important distinction for those us who are reading your opinion; whether it's as an objective third party 'former' owner or as the interested present owner who stands to profit from the sale. It relates directly to the legitimacy of your posts and your valuations.

 

Oh and yeah, it would not stun me at all if you trade back for it.

 

The second time in reply to comicartcom:

 

hey spoon... if you aren't going to like the answers..... don't ask the questions

 

hey SPOON (), why do you assume i wouldn't like the answer? i don't give a what the answer was. i just wanted him to ANSWER the question. after jumping into this thread guns ablazin, he avoided the question put to him directly by felix and then when i asked, he and chuck tried to change the subject.

 

the issue was whether he was commenting on his own piece here in this thread. if the answer is that he doesn't own it, fine. if he does own it while telling us otherwise? then he is a lying sack of sh#t.

 

 

[J.Sid]

Say it ain't so! The last thing I want is for that piece to be 'sold' and for this thread to die...

 

 

[westform]

I don't think it's odd that a piece sells for 'alot' more right after auction. It takes two to do the bid tango. And all 72k means is that that is where the underbidder stopped. The high bidder may have been willing to go substantially higher... but his high bid, or potential high bid did not meet reserve. Pure conjecture, but his high bid may have been 95k and the reserve may have been 100k. So, maybe they came together after the auction. Not hard to fathom or believe.

[comicartcom]

I don't know why so many people seem to be fixed negatively on this piece

that doesn't mean I do or do not advocate the price structure.

I just mean the vitriolic context in which the piece is being treated.

Felix.. you have an issue with a person in the art's past, not the art itself.

Does anyone recognize how this negativity actually reflects upon the saleability and pricing of the art?

[Nexus]

I don't think it's odd that a piece sells for 'alot' more right after auction. It takes two to do the bid tango. And all 72k means is that that is where the underbidder stopped. The high bidder may have been willing to go substantially higher... but his high bid, or potential high bid did not meet reserve. Pure conjecture, but his high bid may have been 95k and the reserve may have been 100k. So, maybe they came together after the auction. Not hard to fathom or believe.

 

That's fine, Dan. I'm not saying that's impossible, just odd. Even going by your conjecture, a sudden "all cash" sale does not make much sense. Not when the piece was sitting on the website (available in any combination of cash/trade along with time payments) for months at around that same value.

 

But who knows. The "former owner" himself mentioned in this thread a "big kids' sandbox" (of which he was a member) and "closed door deals". All we know for sure is that:

 

-- The splash shows up on Romitaman in July 2009 for $150K.

 

-- Mankuta then comes here to tout the page as an objective "former owner" since he claims the splash has been sold/traded to Mike (who would then make a "HUGE" profit) and NOT consigned. He repeats this claim many times.

 

-- Mike backs that story and says he owns the splash.

 

-- Over the next 14 months, the price is incrementally lowered until bottoming out at $105K. It never sells.

 

-- It then appears in November 2010 in Comic Connect's then-upcoming December auction (with a rather incredible auction description).

 

-- At the Decemeber 2010 auction, bidding stops at $72K, reserve not met.

 

-- A few days later (in reply to some posts here) Mike announces that he had actually acquired the splash "this past summer" and had just sold it after the unsuccessful auction for "alot more" and "all cash", to boot.

 

Concurrent to all this:

 

-- Romitaman receives some nice publicity on Mankuta's HOLLYWOOD TREASURE TV show.

 

-- Profiles/HT is auctioning Romitaman's ASM #50 splash (which had been valued on air at $100K).

 

I'm just going by what's been said on these boards, feel free to correct any inaccuracies.

 

BTW...do you believe the auction description's "rumored" $250K (implied all-cash) "sale" of the X-MEN #1 splash?

[Nexus]

I don't know why so many people seem to be fixed negatively on this piece

that doesn't mean I do or do not advocate the price structure.

I just mean the vitriolic context in which the piece is being treated.

Felix.. you have an issue with a person in the art's past, not the art itself.

Does anyone recognize how this negativity actually reflects upon the saleability and pricing of the art?

 

I have not said anything negative about the art. Not in this thread or anywhere else. Where's the "vitriolic context in which the piece is being treated"? There have been some critiques of the artistic quality of the page, but the general consensus about the art appears to be at least positive, if not overwhelmingly so.

 

I don't hold against the art who the former owners may or may not have been. That's not the issue here at all. The art is the art. The possible machinations behind the valuations, marketing, and selling of art in this hobby, and the ramifications for the market, is an entirely separate matter. You have misinterpreted the message.

 

As for the "saleability and pricing" of this piece possibly being affected...I'm not sure how? The piece was shopped privately long before it became a topic here. That it was never successfully sold had more to do with the seller's asking price than anything discussed in this thread.

 

Anyhow, if you believe everything that's been said, then there's nothing for you to worry about since we've been told the piece has sold. If you believe everything that's been said, then the sellers are very happy with the outcome. Interesting then, that you did post here.

[bocaratondefense]

Has there really been that much negativity surrounding this splash? Some people thought the Paul Reinman inking was not ideal, but most of the comments talked about how the layout may be superior to any of the splashes from the first twelve issues. I love this page so much, in fact, that I tried to trade Mike for it a few months ago before it was listed on Comic Connect.

[Nexus]

I love this page so much, in fact, that I tried to trade Mike for it a few months ago before it was listed on Comic Connect.

 

That's interesting Wes...I know you've had great success trading with Mike in the last year (as have I)...including 2 sub-#100 Romita ASM covers. Why wouldn't he trade this time? Was it because he told you the X-MEN #2 splash was actually consigned to him and not his to trade?

[bocaratondefense]

No comment. I do wish I could have grabbed this splash though.

[Nexus]

No comment.

[westform]

I don't know anything about the xmen 1 splash sale, so wouldn't buy into rumors... but then, I usually speed read over puffery type descriptions. In this case, the splash is #2 so that is what I would concentrate on as a buyer. By the way, I think it's a really nice early Kirby splash featuring some uncanny superheroes, and the new owner should be really happy to have it. Definately could be a centerpiece to someone's collection.