• 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.

Gobbledygook Set [First Printing] + Issue #1 Original Cover Art - Mirage/Turtles

Started by com1cbook,

87 posts in this topic

Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted
as this is the original cover to potentially the most important CA comic published.

 

I think TMNT #1 would be the most important of the CA but this still a very nice cover indeed.

 

yeah this is nowhere close and more like the cover of more fun 51 (spectre panel inside) than the cover of 52, to use that analogy. Still freakin' awesome, but nowhere near tmnt 1 awesome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted
And that, for me at least, speaks volumes.

 

I don't know archon turtle, but I don't think we should get too worked up. If it is in fact going to be sold through heritage as was implied I'm sure borock will figure things out before allowing it to be sold.

 

At this point neither party can prove a thing as far as I can tell so we aren't left with much to go on. If he did buy it, you can't fault the guy for not keeping proof of payment. I mean who reasonably keeps more than the original mailer and correspondence after 25 years? And I would have to assume that after possessing it for 25 years the onus would be on peter and kevin to prove its stolen, which would probably be impossible at this point unless they had actually filed a police report, etc. Ugh. Whotta mess.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted
+1, plus he admits he very well could have sold it, but neither of them remember. Plus, I've never heard of an artist lending out original cover art to a fan for a fanzine. But what do I know?

 

It strikes me as unusual too... why wouldn't you just shoot a transparency? still it would be nice if there were more details on both sides (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Archon_Turtle

Archon_Turtle

Posted
Posted

At this point neither party can prove a thing as far as I can tell so we aren't left with much to go on. I would have to assume that after possessing it for 25 years the onus would be on peter and kevin to prove its stolen, which would probably be impossible at this point unless they actually filed a police report, etc., which sounds awfully unlikely if they can't remember if it was or wasn't sold.

 

This isnt something they want to persue anyway. You don't go around filing police reports based on events you don't remember.

 

There is really no second "side". This is not a Seller vs. Kevin thing. Kevin has not expressed any aggression regarding the matter. He simply stated he cannot recall a sale.

 

And I did not release the emails as an assault by Kevin. I simply released them because when my name gets dropped as having done something, I am obligated to make it known exactly what transpired. When it comes to the Turtle community, I am very protective of my name, and what it is used to endorse or damn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Archon_Turtle

Archon_Turtle

Posted
Posted
Aha, so its a non-issue from Kevin's perspective at this point?

 

I don't know if it is an issue for him. I'm only saying that bringing up the issue had absolutely nothing to do with him. It was simply me protecting myself. When I give the nod that an item or situation is authentic, I need that information to come from me, not from a third party. Regardless of what is actually true, the only thing I know about this situation is that I cannot POSSIBLY assertain the truth. Which is exactly why I said nothing. If I could confirm the truth, I would have been shouting about this cover from the mountain tops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TMNT

TMNT

Posted
Posted

I guess more than anything the point of my posts is simply to bring attention to the fact that things may not be as cut and dried as they seem (my opinion of course). I am not throwing stones at the seller as this may very have been a legit sale. And if it is, I wish him the best and hope he makes a killing. A nice sale would likely bring out more Turtles art which I would LOVE.

 

I just wonder why Kevin, who has no dog in this fight and did not/ will not pursue anything through the years, why would he say/imply anything like this at all? If an item is borrowed, then not returned, what does that make it? I agree that the whole lending out of the art sounds odd in the first place, but I think we'll all agree that everything surrounding Kevin and Pete in those early, formative years were probably a bit on the odd side...considering the kooky idea that ultimately struck it big for them.

 

And as a complete aside, was that fanzine ever made? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comix4fun

comix4fun

Posted
Posted
+1, plus he admits he very well could have sold it, but neither of them remember. Plus, I've never heard of an artist lending out original cover art to a fan for a fanzine. But what do I know?

 

 

In the days before scanners, and email, it was entirely possible. Art used to be flying all over the place, not it's all email.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bronty

Bronty

Posted
Posted

At this point neither party can prove a thing as far as I can tell so we aren't left with much to go on. I would have to assume that after possessing it for 25 years the onus would be on peter and kevin to prove its stolen, which would probably be impossible at this point unless they actually filed a police report, etc., which sounds awfully unlikely if they can't remember if it was or wasn't sold.

 

This isnt something they want to persue anyway. You don't go around filing police reports based on events you don't remember.

 

There is really no second "side". This is not a Seller vs. Kevin thing. Kevin has not expressed any aggression regarding the matter. He simply stated he cannot recall a sale.

 

And I did not release the emails as an assault by Kevin. I simply released them because when my name gets dropped as having done something, I am obligated to make it known exactly what transpired. When it comes to the Turtle community, I am very protective of my name, and what it is used to endorse or damn.

 

btw, I will just say its awesome you're having lunch with the guy! How fun would that be. congrats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
joe_collector

joe_collector

Posted
Posted
yeah this is nowhere close and more like the cover of more fun 51 (spectre panel inside) than the cover of 52, to use that analogy. Still freakin' awesome, but nowhere near tmnt 1 awesome.

 

You're mixing up most important CA comic/event with "most valuable CA original art and cover". No way an OA cover *without* the Turtles on it would sell anywhere near one that does, especially their first cover appearance.

 

I would never dispute the simplistic monetary value of TMNT OA covers, since that obviously isn't what I was referring to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing