• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Metropolis now has a gallery of scans....

Started by Red Hook,

80 posts in this topic

acesilver

acesilver

Posted
Posted
Here's a hypothetical question to any and all. Let's say the Action 1 would grade out at 9.4 unrestored. Let's also say it is the finest copy on the planet with no other 9.4 books to match it. Now say you are a BSD with $6 million as your personal fortune. How many of you would pay the $5 million price, if that is indeed what the asking price was, to own the book?

 

I'll start. I would. To own this culturally significant piece of history with it being the very finest in existence would be the pinnacle of collecting. I would also suspect that if I chose to sell it later I wouldn't suffer a loss even after paying $5 million for it initially. There would probably be others who would pay big bucks to own "the best." And if anyone disagrees then I'd suggest reading this:

web page

 

 

I definitely would never commit over 80% of my personal fortune to any one single class of assets, let alone one single item, even a house.

 

As for the article you provide a link to... Ace, as you know, I like Mark Wilson and have done a fair bit of business with him, but the article is a bit self-serving, and it also reads like one of the articles written on stocks in 1999/2000. Whenever there has been a huge run up in prices in any asset class, ALL prior decisions to invest in that asset class look good, and the investments in that asset class at the very beginning of the run up look spectacular, which is what drives everyone else in, looking for similarly spectacular returns.

 

 

I don't disagree that putting 80+% into a single asset is a general investment no-no. Diversification being the accepted rule. And one I follow for personal investing. But in my example I'd still have $1 million after the purchase. I can live a very comfortable lifestyle on that. Plus I'd be in possession of an asset that is widely known, the best in existence, with a rich history to boot and the definitive pedigree.

 

Your point about Mark's article being self-serving is true. You know T that I've bought books from him as well. Let's face it. He's a dealer. Not that there's anything wrong with that (copyright Seinfeld). And if he builds things up and gains buy-in then he ultimately reaps some benefits. The point I take from that article is if you buy a premium, unique product at what might seem like an absurd price one day, chances are if you've picked well, the day will come when you could sell it for much more. Granted there is a HUGE difference between the Action #1 compared to just about any other book.

 

I see my example being different from your stock analogy because we'd be talking about a singular and unique asset. Whereas there are plenty of stocks to pick and choose from. If something is shown to be "the best" without something better to top it, then there will always be a class of people who will desire it. And this class of person will pay the premiums required to be the owner who can claim to own "the best." You, yourself, can bear some witness to what I speak. smile.gif

 

If my example ever came true for me, from one collector who appreciates having the best to another, I'd be happy to let you see it! thumbsup2.gifcloud9.gifdevil.gif

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
drbanner

drbanner

Posted
Posted
Is there a MH copy of AS #1, or was it sold before Chuck put the catalog together? Steve? Timely?

 

Yes there is a copy!

 

Timely

 

Whereabouts known, or unknown?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Timely

Timely

Posted
Posted
Is there a MH copy of AS #1, or was it sold before Chuck put the catalog together? Steve? Timely?

 

Yes there is a copy!

 

Timely

 

Whereabouts known, or unknown?

 

I know where it is, not for sale. frown.gif

 

Timely

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tth2

tth2

Posted
Posted
I see my example being different from your stock analogy because we'd be talking about a singular and unique asset. Whereas there are plenty of stocks to pick and choose from. If something is shown to be "the best" without something better to top it, then there will always be a class of people who will desire it. And this class of person will pay the premiums required to be the owner who can claim to own "the best." You, yourself, can bear some witness to what I speak. smile.gif

 

I definitely have the disease too, but it has to be tempered with a moderate dose of reasonableness. I agree that stocks are very different from comics, particularly a unique comic, and only mentioned stocks in drawing an analogy to the "pump up the volume" articles that were everywhere during the height of the stockmarket bubble.

 

Perhaps a better analogy is Van Gogh's "Portrait of Dr. Gachet", purchased by a Japanese buyer for a still-all-time-auction-record amount of $86.5 million in 1990 at the height of Japan's bubble economy (and a bubble in Impressionist art prices). Granted, the Japanese got taken to the cleaners on a lot of stuff (Rockefeller Center, Pebble Beach, etc.). But the painting is certainly unique, and extremely desirable (one of his best works that's not in a museum). Nonetheless, they have been desperate to unload it for years with no one even coming close to making any kind of face-saving offer over the past 13 years, even when the US was minting overnight billionaires. I think $5 million for Action 1 would be the Dr Gachet of comics.

 

But when you win that Powerball drawing, I'll be most happy to come view your prize acquisition! grin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted
Perhaps a better analogy is Van Gogh's "Portrait of Dr. Gachet", purchased by a Japanese buyer for a still-all-time-auction-record amount of $86.5 million in 1990 at the height of Japan's bubble economy (and a bubble in Impressionist art prices). Granted, the Japanese got taken to the cleaners on a lot of stuff (Rockefeller Center, Pebble Beach, etc.). But the painting is certainly unique, and extremely desirable (one of his best works that's not in a museum). Nonetheless, they have been desperate to unload it for years with no one even coming close to making any kind of face-saving offer over the past 13 years, even when the US was minting overnight billionaires. I think $5 million for Action 1 would be the Dr Gachet of comics.

 

But when you win that Powerball drawing, I'll be most happy to come view your prize acquisition! grin.gif

 

I agree 110%. A great analogy. I also point to Rockefeller Centa and Pebbl eBeach when talking about the big Japan is buying America scare of th e80s. The Van Gogh painting sold for a price 30 years ahead of its time. And 5 million for Action 1 would be a sweet deal for the Dentist... so good noone has taken him up on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
COI

COI

Posted
Posted
sounds scary doesnt it?

Hes the lucky [!@#%^&^] who owns the MH Action#1, Allentown Tec27 and boatloads of awesome comics and stuff.

 

I read an article somewhere(Scoop?) that mentioned that his teenage son is really into collecting GA as well. So, you can guess where his books are going. I would say his son is the lucky [!@#%^&^].

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tth2

tth2

Posted
Posted
Who the 893censored-thumb.gif is the Dentist ?? confused-smiley-013.gif

 

David Anderson. I don't think there's any big secret about his identity, it's been posted in many places on these boards. Funny, all these years I assumed Steve Geppi owned the MH Action 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tth2

tth2

Posted
Posted
I read an article somewhere(Scoop?) that mentioned that his teenage son is really into collecting GA as well. So, you can guess where his books are going. I would say his son is the lucky [!@#%^&^].

 

Sounds like some pretty big inheritance taxes to me, especially if the MH Action 1 has a valuation of $5 million! Perhaps they'll be forced to sell off parts of the collection to pay the taxes. Quick, someone call the IRS... devil.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
delekkerste

delekkerste

Posted
Posted

Perhaps a better analogy is Van Gogh's "Portrait of Dr. Gachet", purchased by a Japanese buyer for a still-all-time-auction-record amount of $86.5 million in 1990

 

An excellent example, and one that I have cited several times myself in the past on these Boards. There are plenty of examples (many from the Japanese bubble years and the global bubble years of a few years' past) of people overpaying for a rare or "unique" asset - whether it be a piece of property, artwork, technology, company, tulip bulb, etc.

 

As for the original poster who said, "I don't disagree that putting 80+% into a single asset is a general investment no-no...But in my example I'd still have $1 million after the purchase. I can live a very comfortable lifestyle on that", I seriously think you should reconsider this statement. Let's say you could earn a 5% return a year through bonds - with $1 million, you'd be able to earn $50,000 a year. Maybe enough to live comfortably on in certain parts of the country, but certainly not in the big cities. Plus, throw a little inflation into the mix and you won't be able to live off that $50K/year for long. Meanwhile, with $6 million, you're earning $300,000 a year in interest payments - enough to upgrade your lifestyle, get out of debt, put the kids through college and take your wife to nice restaurants and vacations. And, with that much capital, you could afford to diversify into stocks, real estate, precious metals, etc. - non-interest bearing assets that may be able to outpace inflation.

 

The lifestyle difference between having $1 million and $6 million is enormous. You and your family would be sacrificing a huge amount to own that Action #1 - unless you have significant other assets or no dependents to support now and in the future, I'd say it would be a hugely selfish move to blow $5 million on that copy. Furthermore, even in the unlikely event that you would be able to sell it for a profit over time (I'm sure no one has even come close to touching that $5 million price tag), it's unlikely that you would be able to sell it for more than you could have investing in other assets. Let's assume you could get 4% tax-free in muni bonds - the Action #1 would have to appreciate by $200K every year just to keep pace.

 

Gene

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lou_fine

lou_fine

Posted
Posted
Who the 893censored-thumb.gif is the Dentist ?? confused-smiley-013.gif

 

David Anderson. I don't think there's any big secret about his identity, it's been posted in many places on these boards. Funny, all these years I assumed Steve Geppi owned the MH Action 1.

 

As you said, it's been well known that Dave has had the MH Action #1 for the past couple of decades. Actually, Dave owns the entire run from Action #1 - #23 since it was all part of the same deal. I believe he owned all of the key MH DC's at one point in time. Dave told me he sold off the MH Flash #1 to buy the Batmobile from the 60's TV show for his collection.

 

Based upon my experience, Dave is an extremely nice man and very unassuming. A really nice man to deal with and definitely somebody that won't try to rip you off or get the upper hand on you in a transaction. I consider myself very fortunate to have been able to acquire several really nice books from him at very resonable prices.

 

Dave is a very reasonable man when it comes to pricing, and I am sure that the $5M figure was simply his way of stating that the MH Action #1 was not for sale, and a hint for Parinno and his buddies to kindly stop pestering him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
acesilver

acesilver

Posted
Posted
Perhaps a better analogy is Van Gogh's "Portrait of Dr. Gachet", purchased by a Japanese buyer for a still-all-time-auction-record amount of $86.5 million in 1990

 

The Van Gogh analogy I'll buy (pun intended) T.

 

An excellent example, and one that I have cited several times myself in the past on these Boards. There are plenty of examples (many from the Japanese bubble years and the global bubble years of a few years' past) of people overpaying for a rare or "unique" asset - whether it be a piece of property, artwork, technology, company, tulip bulb, etc.

 

As for the original poster who said, "I don't disagree that putting 80+% into a single asset is a general investment no-no...But in my example I'd still have $1 million after the purchase. I can live a very comfortable lifestyle on that", I seriously think you should reconsider this statement. Let's say you could earn a 5% return a year through bonds - with $1 million, you'd be able to earn $50,000 a year. Maybe enough to live comfortably on in certain parts of the country, but certainly not in the big cities. Plus, throw a little inflation into the mix and you won't be able to live off that $50K/year for long. Meanwhile, with $6 million, you're earning $300,000 a year in interest payments - enough to upgrade your lifestyle, get out of debt, put the kids through college and take your wife to nice restaurants and vacations. And, with that much capital, you could afford to diversify into stocks, real estate, precious metals, etc. - non-interest bearing assets that may be able to outpace inflation.

 

The lifestyle difference between having $1 million and $6 million is enormous. You and your family would be sacrificing a huge amount to own that Action #1 - unless you have significant other assets or no dependents to support now and in the future, I'd say it would be a hugely selfish move to blow $5 million on that copy. Furthermore, even in the unlikely event that you would be able to sell it for a profit over time (I'm sure no one has even come close to touching that $5 million price tag), it's unlikely that you would be able to sell it for more than you could have investing in other assets. Let's assume you could get 4% tax-free in muni bonds - the Action #1 would have to appreciate by $200K every year just to keep pace.

 

Gene

 

I do agree Gene with your points. There would be a lifestyle difference and the amount of potential $ return would be far less comparing $1 mil. to $6 mil.

 

Were this hypothetical example to come true today I'd still have the following going for me; I earn a very good annual income already, I put a decent % of my annual income into retirement plans, I do a pretty good job covering all of the home/family things you describe as it is (I'd do better with $6 mil. though I grant you). I certainly could invest in a variety of options like you note.

 

The one piece that I think is missing from your otherwise dead on assessment is remembering what most of us are on these boards, lovers of comics. The focus of your examples IMO is mainly increasing wealth. I agree with you that to make such a purchase would certainly have many selfish characteristics. Yet if I'm the person who has this wealth and support my family then shouldn't I be entitled to enjoy some of the fruits of my labor? It would give me a great deal of pleasure to be the owner of said example. Time would show how my children would do financially on my pick. I suspect they'd still come out well in either case. Whether the book was desired by another collector wanting to own the best and paying a high $ topping my original price or even if I had to sell below my purchase price (like the Van Gogh example, or even some comics that I've bought and sold). But during all of that time I'd have enjoyed the pleasure and privilege of having the most important and finest condition comic ever IMO.

 

Not to mention that I'd now be the subject of wondering threads on these boards. grin.gif I wonder if I'd earn a nickname? Maybe "The Salesman" or "The Manager." 27_laughing.gif27_laughing.gif

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Aman619

Aman619

Posted
Posted

Gene, I remember an aspect of that Van Gogh sale that explained it in a different light. It wasnt a collector who bought it but a Japanese corporation. And it had something to do with the real estate bubble that was about to burst. So no collector lost money, just shareholders... like Enron. Any of this ring a bell?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing