Captain America #6 Timely Jack Kirby art

[comicartcom]

Felix.. I did ask them that question as well

 

 

 

 

looks like Sarah ignored the question again

 

 

 

[comicartcom]

But your view of the current market does seem like sour grapes in that context. And sorry to say, so does Richard's (for an entirely different reason).

 

sorry Felix.. you're wrong.. I do indeed feel that way too much of comic art (and comic books) is overpriced. Even top quality merch.. However, aside from the UN survey, it's difficult to put an exact % or even years range out there. But does it have to be sour grapes? How can I have sour grapes towards art?? People - oh yes.. Art?? You must be kidding.

 

for the record, I think that the 3 Prince Valiant sundays from the late 50s that Heritage sold in 2009 (I think) in one auction were 2-3x value at $20k+ to $30k+. My opinion there was properly reflected in the subsequent auctions where similar pieces went for $10k+

 

just one example.. I think silver/bronze art by these artists is similarly overpriced: Nick Cardy, Jim Aparo, Herb Trimpe.. and I definitely think that Todd McFarlane art is way-way overpriced. They're just some.. I couldn't possibly list all of them.

 

That said, I don't know how you don't see the sarcasm or humor in mine & Paull's posts..

 

ps.. what should I ask the world leaders when I run into them at the Pottsdamm summit??

 

[*paull*]

As I recall, you mentioned that you have collected in a very limited fashion throughout the years. Mostly owing to always believing that the market was overpriced.

 

I have collected very slowly, but not because I thought stuff was overvalued.... simply because the stuff I wanted was too expensive. I have plenty of collections that I have bought at the top of market value or beyond, so I don't avoid buying because something is overvalued.

 

 

If that was the case, then you would been wrong. Not criticizing you for being conservative. But your view of the current market does seem like sour grapes in that context.

 

As I said, the only reason I didn't buy more is because of limited funds. I can't keep up with all my collections AND buy OA regularly when values are spiraling upwards. One nice OA piece equals a large number of vintage records!

 

I bought a piece in the last Heritage auction.... but it was something that I think passed under the radar, not something with a wild valuation.

 

 

Mostly, though, my annoyance had more to do with strongly opinionated (yet otherwise secretive) anonymous posters than anything else. That's just my knee-jerk reaction to KK-type posts and I admit that's my problem, not yours. I'll take Richard's advice and get a sense of humor:P

 

 

You need to lighten up and enjoy. Don't take opinions so seriously.... do you take it personally when an analyst downgrades your stocks?

 

Don't you think that people that come on too strong here and on OA mailing lists could possibly keep people from participating? You can stop grinding your ax... ::

[Nexus]

Heh...I just call it like I see it, but fair enough. I'll take this to PM so as not to clutter the list up anymore.

 

I'm sorry everyone else will miss my newfound sense of humor and jokes:P

[CollectingFool]

Wow, I didn't think this thread was going to come back so strongly. For the record, I don't think it's all post 1985 that's overpriced. Believe me, there's a lot of pre-1985 stuff that's overpriced. It's just that in the pre-1985 stuff I tend to find more stuff I like and stuff I think it's undervalued.

 

I guess one of the reasons people react so poorly to the prices of some of the modern art can be explained like this:

 

I've been in the market for about 15 years. I've seen art by artists that are considered the icons of the hobby go from a few hundred dollars a piece to 5 and 6 digit numbers. While I think a lot of those prices are inflated an argument can be made that the growth was somewhat organic and that the price grew with the hobby and the "discovery" of those artists by new collectors in the hobby. Another thing that makes the prices a little more palatable is that even though it confounds me, for the most part they seem to resell for more.

 

Now look at a brand new piece by a hot up-and-comer or even a modern established artist. Because of their knowledge of the collector market and having agents that are embedded in the hobby, their pieces are coming out at prices comparable to those of older items that have an established market. They have the buzz around them and collectors are now over the mental roadblock of certain price levels because they've seen other art go for that much. Collectors then spend premium dollars on pieces with no track record or established market. With a few rare exceptions, I don't see many newer big dollar pieces being sold by artist's agents going up in value when they are resold. Again, I know some artists carry a premium but those artists usually have a track record when it comes to resale prices.

 

Some post 1985 stuff is also suffering from the nostalgia bubble the 70's stuff suffered from a few years ago. Still can't wrap my mind around what some of those 1985 era pieces go for. It's the people who collected comics as children and young adults during those years that have entered the market in the last 10 years and are now at an age where they can afford to spend the big bucks. Couple that with ever increasing OA prices overall and they can justify spending obscene amounts on nostalgia driven pieces.

 

I suppose no one will know what's overvalued now until 20 or 30 years from now when we can see what pieces were able to hold their values and increase from here. Since I don't have a time machine and I'm not clairvoyant, I'm more careful about where I put the big bucks. Well, the small-to-medium bucks anyway.

 

 

[ShaneTurgeon]

As someone who's still relatively new to the OA world and who's generally buying post-1985 art, primarily due to nostalgia, but also due to the affordability the offer compared to their pre-1985 counterparts, i'm curious what those of you on that side of the fence think constitutes overvalued?

 

Is low four figures for a key splash or cover considered overvalued? Mid-four figures? Five?

 

Most of the really nice pieces i've been buying have been between the $1k-$2k range, which is more than enough for me, but IMO and limited experience, seems rather reasonable in the grand scheme of things...

 

[batman_fan]

I buy what I like (I know we all say that) but given my changing taste, I have started considering selling certain items which I would have said I will never sell. Once I hit this point, what I paid for an item really matters since it now determines whether I "make" money, break even, or lose money. This has also led me to consider what I pay for a future item since at some point I could be in a similar situation. I have been buying art for over 15 years and I am amazed at the prices paid. I look at some of the splashes I bought five years ago that now go for more the 5x. I couldn't afford them at todays price. Again, we all say we will never sell something but the reality is we all can end up in a situation where we have no choice.

[dem1138]

It's baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!

 

Apparently whoever bought it read the boards and decided not to pay. Seeing as how the seller identified it as a Kirby page and most would agree that it wasn't, I certainly don't blame the buyer for pulling out based on the misrepresentation. This time it's NO RESERVE so it'll be interesting to see what it goes for.

 

Any guesses? I say $14,500

 

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=140405666378&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT#ht_111626wt_1964

[fc]

someone tossed around that much money the first time around to win and they were not even sure

who drew/inked what?

 

amazing... research was just an after thought i suppose.

[Crowzilla]

Wonder why he doesn't quote that Theakston says it's NOT Kirby, or that Evanier who was Kirby's primary assistant for years also says it's not Kirby?

 

[Crowzilla]

Wonder why he doesn't quote that Theakston says it's NOT Kirby, or that Evanier who was Kirby's primary assistant for years also says it's not Kirby?

 

[comicartcom]

Crow baby.. my opinion

 

after careful examination, I believe that Kirby probably had something to do with the pencils on the page, but they may have been loose pencils.

 

But the problem is that it still a studio work as was all of the Cap art (work of many hands, some unknown). This is the same situation with Superman art, Batman art and on and on and unless an artist who is involved says "that's Jack, that's me, that's Bill" etc, anything else, including from experts like myself, Evanier, Theakston etc are still just opinions, although it's hard to discount the opinions of Theakston and Evanier who both knew Jack intimately.

 

Something I don't understand... WHY THE HELL HASN'T SOMEONE ASKED JOE SIMON????

 

 

[Koko]

I had no dog in the fight. I looked at the page in question not only as a historian, but as an artist as well. Simon was aping Kirby (and to some extent Lou Fine), and I see no traces of Kirby. If you look at the early Caps Jack and Joe split the workload, each doing pages on their own. The page in question, to my eye, was one that Simon produced. The stucture is weak, the figure-work off, and there is a lack of drawing that is typical of Simon at this period (and for the rest of his career.) In the seller's defense, I doubt that they knew the difference. The other page that was auctioned was clearly Kirby pencils. Not as dramatic, but will eventually be the better buy.

Greg Theakston

Pure Imagination

[comicartcom]

and there you go.. Greg is without question one of the best experts on Kirby and brings up all the pertinent points.

 

But still, why hasn't anyone asked Joe Simon? It would seem to be the operative thing to do

 

 

[NelsonAI]

I agree with you Rich. If you have someone like Joe Simon available to ask, why not? He still makes a few convention appearances and is fan friendly.

 

Cheers!

N.

 

 

[bluechip]

I agree with you Rich. If you have someone like Joe Simon available to ask, why not? He still makes a few convention appearances and is fan friendly.

 

Cheers!

N.

 

 

 

As I understand it Joe Simon also has one of them there telephones.

[NelsonAI]

[quote=bluechip

 

As I understand it Joe Simon also has one of them there telephones.

 

Not everyone lists their contact info (telephone numbers or e-mails) for the public domain. Too many geeks asking for autographs or commissions.

 

 

Cheers!

N.

[bluechip]

[quote=bluechip

 

As I understand it Joe Simon also has one of them there telephones.

 

Not everyone lists their contact info (telephone numbers or e-mails) for the public domain. Too many geeks asking for autographs or commissions.

 

 

Cheers!

N.

 

 

Good point. Guess I figured a guy pushing 100 might still have a "party line."

 

I wouldn't be surprised if more than a few folk on this board know how to reach him.