X-Men2 Splash

[glendgold]

It's a great splash, no doubt. I myself am interested for this reason (and apologies for repeating something I wrote a few years ago): in any communal activity, from roommates sharing a house to corporations manufacturing and selling a product, you behave according to the precepts of a moral pyramid. (My econ teacher put this on the board in 8th grade -- sparing you an attempt to actually draw a pyramid, imagine these four bases for decisions as if they're in a pyramid shape:

 

MORAL

 

LEGAL

 

ACCEPTED PRACTICE

 

THE LAW OF THE JUNGLE

 

I'm sure there's more information on the net about how that works, but my teacher's point 35 years ago was that obviously the best, most helpful way to make decisions was if they had a moral basis, and if not that then a legal, and if not that...

 

His point was also that more people followed the law of the jungle and fewer the moral path.

 

Funny, given wikileaks and whatnot, but I've noticed that regardless of the net and the price databases, there is sometimes less and less transparency as time goes on, not more.

 

I have no idea what's going on with this splash's ownership or pricing, but as the money behind the hobby solidifies, I think an inquiry into where on the moral pyramid a given transaction falls is -- as long as it's factual -- at least interesting if not also an inquiry to how things work around here.

[ecfanman]

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.

 

And who is to say that the high bidder didn't just offer Burkey the $72K directly, cutting Metropolis out of a commission? Burkey would have gotten more this way than if he sold through Metro. I'm not saying this is the "right" thing to do, but in a pool full of sharks, ...

[tth2]

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.

 

And who is to say that the high bidder didn't just offer Burkey the $72K directly, cutting Metropolis out of a commission? Burkey would have gotten more this way than if he sold through Metro. I'm not saying this is the "right" thing to do, but in a pool full of sharks, ...

Why isn`t it "the `right` thing to do"? He listed it on Metro, it failed to meet reserve by auction`s end. At that point, he no longer has any obligation to use Metro and is free to sell the piece by any means that he wishes.

[Unca Ben]

Roger Waters just did "The Wall" at a local venue.

I wish he would have played this song too...

 

Money, get away

Get a good job with more pay and your O.K.

Money it's a gas

Grab that cash with both hands and make a stash

New car, caviar, four star daydream,

Think I'll buy me a football team

Money get back

I'm all right Jack keep your hands off my stack.

Money it's a hit

Don't give me that do goody good wildly_fanciful_statement

I'm in the hi-fidelity first class traveling set

And I think I need a Lear jet

Money it's a crime

Share it fairly but don't take a slice of my pie

Money so they say

Is the root of all evil today

But if you ask for a rise it's no surprise that they're

giving none away

[jbud73]

It's a great splash, no doubt. I myself am interested for this reason (and apologies for repeating something I wrote a few years ago): in any communal activity, from roommates sharing a house to corporations manufacturing and selling a product, you behave according to the precepts of a moral pyramid. (My econ teacher put this on the board in 8th grade -- sparing you an attempt to actually draw a pyramid, imagine these four bases for decisions as if they're in a pyramid shape:

 

MORAL

 

LEGAL

 

ACCEPTED PRACTICE

 

THE LAW OF THE JUNGLE

 

I'm sure there's more information on the net about how that works, but my teacher's point 35 years ago was that obviously the best, most helpful way to make decisions was if they had a moral basis, and if not that then a legal, and if not that...

 

His point was also that more people followed the law of the jungle and fewer the moral path.

 

Funny, given wikileaks and whatnot, but I've noticed that regardless of the net and the price databases, there is sometimes less and less transparency as time goes on, not more.

 

I have no idea what's going on with this splash's ownership or pricing, but as the money behind the hobby solidifies, I think an inquiry into where on the moral pyramid a given transaction falls is -- as long as it's factual -- at least interesting if not also an inquiry to how things work around here.

 

I'd call that business ethics 101. But, and sometimes I wonder if people realize this START at LAW OF THE JUNGLE and proceed downwards in any collectibles market environment when attributing morals. As in, 'the morals, there are no morals.' Assume lack of transparency, assume everything.

 

I know what Felix is trying to reconstruct, I applaud him for trying to do so. After years in the HG comics arena I just came to foster the premise that I would expect ever tactic possible in every transaction I entered into and then hope to be pleasantly surprised when the contrary occurred. OA has even more barriers to transparency, lack of reported so many things. There is a fine line between marketing and manipulation, in fact one has a goal of impact on the other.

 

As always I enjoy reading these threads as a reminder to not get caught up in the hype, where there's smoke, there's usually an inferno etc etc. Thanks to all for their opinions.

[romitaman]

I haven't read any posts until today about the X-Men 2 splash after I sent to the list about the splash selling......but its interesting indeed to hear everyone's comments!

 

I guess my post here about this x-men 2 splash will be my last on this subject!

 

as everyone knows who deals with me.....I try to work with anyone who is buying a significant piece of art, and I always will give great time payment plan options.... especially on higher ticket items....

 

in turn I asked Jon about time payments on the x-men 2 splash, and Jon in 2009 agreed to give me 1 full year to pay off the X-Men 2 splash at an amount we agreed to, and I was allowed to put it on my website and do with it as I wanted.

 

time payments on the splash was a great advantage for me as I didn't have to pay it off in full until after San Diego 2010 and I could change my pricing as I saw fit to try to move it!

 

so I wasn't full owner of it until it was paid off in summer 2010.

 

I'm not ashamed to tell people that I will lower prices on art if I've had it a long while...but on the X-Men #2 splash, I didn't want to trade it unless I felt the offer justified trading it, with my giving up all cash for it.

So I only wanted cash offers on it... and yes, I did proceed to lower it slightly over time, a little at a time, versus having to take more trade than cash.

 

I'd gotten no offers that were MOSTLY CASH since the summer of 2009,..... so I used Vincent for the comic connect auction when we talked at the new York con in October, as he felt it had a chance to sell in his auction, so why would I not take a chance to find a buyer though his auction when it didn't cost me a penny to try?

 

it didn't meet reserve in the auction.... but after the auction I got an offer privately that was VERY close to what I wanted for the splash so I took it!

 

no time payments....no trade...... and a great deal for me to accept.

 

so hopefully this clears some air about the x-men 2 splash!

 

I'm glad I don't collect Kirby art, for if I did, i'd have kept this one for sure!

 

Mike

www.romitaman.com

 

 

also...in my last email.... I mentioned I had a real nice 1961 Kirby FF 3 battle page and a real nice 1962 Kirby hulk 4 origin page.....

 

..........well I just sold both pages to a collector privately who saw this post on here and emailed me privately... so I assure everyone.....the Kirby market is doing very well! )

[clemso]

I haven't read any posts until today about the X-Men 2 splash after I sent to the list about the splash selling......but its interesting indeed to hear everyone's comments!

 

I guess my post here about this x-men 2 splash will be my last on this subject!

 

as everyone knows who deals with me.....I try to work with anyone who is buying a significant piece of art, and I always will give great time payment plan options.... especially on higher ticket items....

 

in turn I asked Jon about time payments on the x-men 2 splash, and Jon in 2009 agreed to give me 1 full year to pay off the X-Men 2 splash at an amount we agreed to, and I was allowed to put it on my website and do with it as I wanted.

 

time payments on the splash was a great advantage for me as I didn't have to pay it off in full until after San Diego 2010 and I could change my pricing as I saw fit to try to move it!

 

so I wasn't full owner of it until it was paid off in summer 2010.

 

I'm not ashamed to tell people that I will lower prices on art if I've had it a long while...but on the X-Men #2 splash, I didn't want to trade it unless I felt the offer justified trading it, with my giving up all cash for it.

So I only wanted cash offers on it... and yes, I did proceed to lower it slightly over time, a little at a time, versus having to take more trade than cash.

 

I'd gotten no offers that were MOSTLY CASH since the summer of 2009,..... so I used Vincent for the comic connect auction when we talked at the new York con in October, as he felt it had a chance to sell in his auction, so why would I not take a chance to find a buyer though his auction when it didn't cost me a penny to try?

 

it didn't meet reserve in the auction.... but after the auction I got an offer privately that was VERY close to what I wanted for the splash so I took it!

 

no time payments....no trade...... and a great deal for me to accept.

 

so hopefully this clears some air about the x-men 2 splash!

 

I'm glad I don't collect Kirby art, for if I did, i'd have kept this one for sure!

 

Mike

www.romitaman.com

 

 

also...in my last email.... I mentioned I had a real nice 1961 Kirby FF 3 battle page and a real nice 1962 Kirby hulk 4 origin page.....

 

..........well I just sold both pages to a collector privately who saw this post on here and emailed me privately... so I assure everyone.....the Kirby market is doing very well! )

 

Congrats on the sale of the two Kirby pieces Mike, would love to have seen the scans of them though before you sold. Any chance of posing them?

[Galactus]

I haven't read any posts until today about the X-Men 2 splash after I sent to the list about the splash selling......but its interesting indeed to hear everyone's comments!

 

I guess my post here about this x-men 2 splash will be my last on this subject!

 

as everyone knows who deals with me.....I try to work with anyone who is buying a significant piece of art, and I always will give great time payment plan options.... especially on higher ticket items....

 

in turn I asked Jon about time payments on the x-men 2 splash, and Jon in 2009 agreed to give me 1 full year to pay off the X-Men 2 splash at an amount we agreed to, and I was allowed to put it on my website and do with it as I wanted.

 

time payments on the splash was a great advantage for me as I didn't have to pay it off in full until after San Diego 2010 and I could change my pricing as I saw fit to try to move it!

 

so I wasn't full owner of it until it was paid off in summer 2010.

 

I'm not ashamed to tell people that I will lower prices on art if I've had it a long while...but on the X-Men #2 splash, I didn't want to trade it unless I felt the offer justified trading it, with my giving up all cash for it.

So I only wanted cash offers on it... and yes, I did proceed to lower it slightly over time, a little at a time, versus having to take more trade than cash.

 

I'd gotten no offers that were MOSTLY CASH since the summer of 2009,..... so I used Vincent for the comic connect auction when we talked at the new York con in October, as he felt it had a chance to sell in his auction, so why would I not take a chance to find a buyer though his auction when it didn't cost me a penny to try?

 

it didn't meet reserve in the auction.... but after the auction I got an offer privately that was VERY close to what I wanted for the splash so I took it!

 

no time payments....no trade...... and a great deal for me to accept.

 

so hopefully this clears some air about the x-men 2 splash!

 

I'm glad I don't collect Kirby art, for if I did, i'd have kept this one for sure!

 

Mike

 

 

Mike thanks for posting, unfortunately your reply brings up some points that i find leave me asking myself more questions than before you had posted.

 

If you struck up a time payment deal with Mankuta (at a price i presume is less than the $105k that you ended up lowering the piece to), surely Mankuta would have first insisted that the piece be given to you on a week or a month's consignment, thereby potentially realising $135k or more of the $150k initial asking price.

 

Given that Mankuta is not a newbie (who are prone to making foolish mistakes), why would he or anyone who was not receiving immediate payment for the piece, not use your consignment service for a short peiod of time before converting to your fixed price offer over an extended period of time?,

 

I ask as i would have thought that a modicum of common sense would dictate that any initial offering of this piece may generate a potential sale and therefore why risk loosing $30-$50k when the alternative is to hold out for a year long payment plan, that you would just have start a week or month later ?

 

You dont need to go into any more specifics but i'm left asking myself if i am the only person looking at your answer and wondering the above ?

[westform]

Hmmmm. That thought never crossed my mind. I just don't understand the premise. If someone commits to a deal whether it is time payments or not, it is a done deal. If the person is upstanding, like Mike B., it is 'money in the bank'. I can think of many times when that money in the bank is preferable to taking the 'risk' of putting something on consignment. The consigned item may or may not sell. If you 'test the waters' you may overexpose the piece. Or, maybe you are committing to a new piece and need a commitment on the piece you are selling.

 

I guess this hits a nerve because I am an idi0t like Jon I guess, because I have sold to dealers before. In fact, I'm working on a potential deal with Mike right now. Should I just consign with him? Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe I'm willing to let him 'potentially' make a few more coins for taking all my risk off the table, especially if he meets my price. I've been doing this almost 20 years and what I'm reading into your post is the supposition that one should never sell to dealers. While I don't do it exclusively (most of my deals are with collectors or outside the hobby sellers) I have many times sold to dealers; they have deep pockets, reputations, and specialties that they 'collect'. If someone treats me right and meets my price I don't care if they are going to keep it or profit from the piece. Just my experience.

 

Actually, the only question that Mike's post raised for me was why he felt the need to post in the first place. Usually, internet posts are misunderstood by someone and it is almost impossible to answer everyone's questions in a short written statement. If I really need to know, I would pick up the phone and call him. I have no idea what the history of ownership is after I sold it, but mostly I hate to say it seems like gossip. The piece is the piece and who owns it should not affect its value or enjoyment by a new owner. I may be missing the point here, but that's my snowed in, cabin fevered assessment for the day...

[Galactus]

Hmmmm. That thought never crossed my mind. I just don't understand the premise. If someone commits to a deal whether it is time payments or not, it is a done deal. If the person is upstanding, like Mike B., it is 'money in the bank'. I can think of many times when that money in the bank is preferable to taking the 'risk' of putting something on consignment. The consigned item may or may not sell. If you 'test the waters' you may overexpose the piece. Or, maybe you are committing to a new piece and need a commitment on the piece you are selling.

 

I guess this hits a nerve because I am an idi0t like Jon I guess, because I have sold to dealers before. In fact, I'm working on a potential deal with Mike right now. Should I just consign with him? Maybe. Maybe not. Maybe I'm willing to let him 'potentially' make a few more coins for taking all my risk off the table, especially if he meets my price. I've been doing this almost 20 years and what I'm reading into your post is the supposition that one should never sell to dealers. While I don't do it exclusively (most of my deals are with collectors or outside the hobby sellers) I have many times sold to dealers; they have deep pockets, reputations, and specialties that they 'collect'. If someone treats me right and meets my price I don't care if they are going to keep it or profit from the piece. Just my experience.

 

Uhmmm no i am not saying that no one should sell outright to a dealer, what i am saying though is that if i was in a position to have a piece offered for sale at $150k at 8-10% commision for a week and if no sale occurs, go onto a firm sale with time payments over a year or go straight onto time payments for a year and potentially leave $40k+ on the table, i think i would put it on consignment with a dealer for a week.

 

Surely everyone would take that kind of route seeing as exposure is not in question, as the piece would after that initial week or month, be sold to the dealer at an agreed upon price, therefore there is no risk to the seller.

[tth2]

I have no idea what the history of ownership is after I sold it, but mostly I hate to say it seems like gossip.

It`s not "gossip" when the former owner and the then-current owner post on here, as statements of fact, who owns it. What you seem to be labeling as "gossip", and seem desperate to tamp down, is discussion by various people who were curious about discrepancies that were detected in such posted statements of fact.

 

The piece is the piece and who owns it should not affect its value or enjoyment by a new owner. I may be missing the point here, but that's my snowed in, cabin fevered assessment for the day...

You`re right, you ARE missing the point.

[Nexus]

I'm resurrecting this thread from almost 7 years ago because:

 

1. It's essential reading for anyone interested in a peek behind the curtain. This is especially true for newbies.

 

2. All threads serve as historical documents. They don't go away.

 

3. Pay attention to who wrote what in this thread. Which side they chose. Again, informative, especially for newbies.

 

In case it wasn't obvious, I knew all along what was going on here. As did others. Yesterday, I got absolute confirmation that I was correct from one of the parties involved. It's never too late to set the record straight, and I appreciated it. It's nice having an epilogue after all these years.

 

Anyway, don't take too much at face value when it comes to numbers in this hobby. Also, Lambo is one of the greatest posters of all time, and we need him here more!

 

 

[comix4fun]

We got appearances by Hari and Cheeky Joe and Steve F. and a bunch of others who were smarter than I am moved on from this place.

 

And Ruben E. I miss Ruben, where is he?

 

Let's not forget an appearance by the famous Glen Gold Pyramid™

 

I had almost forgotten about this...has it really been 5-6 years?

[Doc Joe]

I just got to Page 5...could not really take it any more

 

its basically Real Housewife's of the CGC Boards

 

Did you end up fighting Jon at the Convention?

[eewwnuk]

what's the cliffs note? someone overpricing xmen 2?

[Nexus]

I just got to Page 5...could not really take it any more

 

its basically Real Housewife's of the CGC Boards

 

Did you end up fighting Jon at the Convention?

 

Too bad for you, you're going to miss all the good stuff.

 

The meeting took place at Brian Schutzer's booth at SDCC. You can ask him how it went down.

[Brian Peck]

Was it that long ago? I remember being at the booth.

[comix4fun]

This thread makes me realize it's been 10 years since I've been back to San Diego.

 

But now I REALLY don't want to go.

[eewwnuk]

i'll finish it up during lunch. but the beginnings sound like the '09 versions of peter g and meeley man!

[Doc McCoy]

I started reading it, but then began doing shots every time Mankuta mentioned his house in Hollywood and finally passed out before I could finish.