Biggest OA Prices

[delekkerste]

Probably already been said, but I would remove all "Reserve Not Met"s from the list. Those figures are meaningless as they could just have been bumped to one increment below the reserve by the auction house for all we know (a.k.a. "chandelier bidding", which is standard practice).

 

I know, but that is why I don't include them in the ordered list, but just as a note. It also gives an idea of where the reserve was at.

 

I hear you, but, by that logic, you might as well list the asking price of certain big-ticket pieces that went unsold on dealer websites as well since a RNM level reached in an auction might also be effectively set by the seller/auction house and not by any bidders (or bidders who knew the reserve and were more free with their bidding). I just think any data that doesn't reflect actual, completed cash sales is more misleading than helpful, and I bet a lot of people here would agree with that.

[groovyedwin]

Probably already been said, but I would remove all "Reserve Not Met"s from the list. Those figures are meaningless as they could just have been bumped to one increment below the reserve by the auction house for all we know (a.k.a. "chandelier bidding", which is standard practice).

 

I know, but that is why I don't include them in the ordered list, but just as a note. It also gives an idea of where the reserve was at.

 

I hear you, but, by that logic, you might as well list the asking price of certain big-ticket pieces that went unsold on dealer websites as well since a RNM level reached in an auction might also be effectively set by the seller/auction house and not by any bidders (or bidders who knew the reserve and were more free with their bidding). I just think any data that doesn't reflect actual, completed cash sales is more misleading than helpful, and I bet a lot of people here would agree with that.

 

+1

 

The below is my attempt to beat a deadhorse.

**************

I am offering for sale a publish comic book page for the low reserve of $1 million dollars. The page is from a book published after 2000. After this one is listed, I have 9 more pages each having a reserve price in excess of $500,000. Wow, I just realized I have the top 10 listed single pages.

**************

Edwin

[truthAndSoulBaby]

Probably already been said, but I would remove all "Reserve Not Met"s from the list. Those figures are meaningless as they could just have been bumped to one increment below the reserve by the auction house for all we know (a.k.a. "chandelier bidding", which is standard practice).

 

I know, but that is why I don't include them in the ordered list, but just as a note. It also gives an idea of where the reserve was at.

 

I hear you, but, by that logic, you might as well list the asking price of certain big-ticket pieces that went unsold on dealer websites as well since a RNM level reached in an auction might also be effectively set by the seller/auction house and not by any bidders (or bidders who knew the reserve and were more free with their bidding). I just think any data that doesn't reflect actual, completed cash sales is more misleading than helpful, and I bet a lot of people here would agree with that.

 

+1

 

The below is my attempt to beat a deadhorse.

**************

I am offering for sale a publish comic book page for the low reserve of $1 million dollars. The page is from a book published after 2000. After this one is listed, I have 9 more pages each having a reserve price in excess of $500,000. Wow, I just realized I have the top 10 listed single pages.

**************

Edwin

 

what you say is different from what he listed; he listed what the actual auction closed at without meeting its reserve. so that's still the high bid. mebbe skewed (downward i say, i say, i say, ahem) cuz of the reserve, but still a sign of what the market's willing to pay in an open auction ...

[delekkerste]

what you say is different from what he listed; he listed what the actual auction closed at without meeting its reserve. so that's still the high bid. mebbe skewed (downward i say, i say, i say, ahem) cuz of the reserve, but still a sign of what the market's willing to pay in an open auction ...

 

That is not necessarily accurate - the Reserve Not Met level might have been achieved through real bidding or it may just be the level to which the auction house bumped up the price via chandelier bidding to one increment below the reserve price and may not reflect what the market is willing to pay at all. Did two bidders pump up "Land of Terror" to $172,500 or did the auction house bump it up there because there was a $175,000 reserve?

 

I firmly believe that any Reserve Not Met data is potentially more misleading than useful and should be removed from the list. We simply don't know if there were real buyers at those levels or not. Even if they were real bidders, who's to say in those situations whether they were really willing to pay those prices? If people knew a reserve was set at $500K, why not bid the Supes #14 cover up to $400K and change knowing that they wouldn't be on the hook for it? Also, in reserve auctions like that, there's also the potential for a consignor's buddies helping to shill the price up closer to the reserve price.

 

Like I said, there's more potential misinformation than value in keeping those data points. Unless cash actually changes hands and a deal is done, we simply don't know what really happened in a RNM situation or otherwise uncompleted sale.

[truthAndSoulBaby]

what you say is different from what he listed; he listed what the actual auction closed at without meeting its reserve. so that's still the high bid. mebbe skewed (downward i say, i say, i say, ahem) cuz of the reserve, but still a sign of what the market's willing to pay in an open auction ...

 

That is not necessarily accurate - the Reserve Not Met level might have been achieved through real bidding or it may just be the level to which the auction house bumped up the price via chandelier bidding to one increment below the reserve price and may not reflect what the market is willing to pay at all. Did two bidders pump up "Land of Terror" to $172,500 or did the auction house bump it up there because there was a $175,000 reserve?

 

I firmly believe that any Reserve Not Met data is potentially more misleading than useful and should be removed from the list. We simply don't know if there were real buyers at those levels or not. Even if they were real bidders, who's to say in those situations whether they were really willing to pay those prices? If people knew a reserve was set at $500K, why not bid the Supes #14 cover up to $400K and change knowing that they wouldn't be on the hook for it? Also, in reserve auctions like that, there's also the potential for a consignor's buddies helping to shill the price up closer to the reserve price.

 

Like I said, there's more potential misinformation than value in keeping those data points. Unless cash actually changes hands and a deal is done, we simply don't know what really happened in a RNM situation or otherwise uncompleted sale.

 

i agree with some of what you say, however, any auction has the potential for shilling and thrill-bidding.

 

agreed that the house bump of one increment below the reserve is deceptive and this is somewhat similar to "groovyedwin"s ruse.

 

Nonetheless, i would think that anyone that might be looking at acquiring a GA supes or 'tec cover would want those two data points, even if taken with a HUGE grain of salt, as indicated by his "did not meet reserve" comment.

[groovyedwin]

Probably already been said, but I would remove all "Reserve Not Met"s from the list. Those figures are meaningless as they could just have been bumped to one increment below the reserve by the auction house for all we know (a.k.a. "chandelier bidding", which is standard practice).

 

I know, but that is why I don't include them in the ordered list, but just as a note. It also gives an idea of where the reserve was at.

 

I hear you, but, by that logic, you might as well list the asking price of certain big-ticket pieces that went unsold on dealer websites as well since a RNM level reached in an auction might also be effectively set by the seller/auction house and not by any bidders (or bidders who knew the reserve and were more free with their bidding). I just think any data that doesn't reflect actual, completed cash sales is more misleading than helpful, and I bet a lot of people here would agree with that.

 

+1

 

The below is my attempt to beat a deadhorse.

**************

I am offering for sale a publish comic book page for the low reserve of $1 million dollars. The page is from a book published after 2000. After this one is listed, I have 9 more pages each having a reserve price in excess of $500,000. Wow, I just realized I have the top 10 listed single pages.

**************

Edwin

 

what you say is different from what he listed; he listed what the actual auction closed at without meeting its reserve. so that's still the high bid. mebbe skewed (downward i say, i say, i say, ahem) cuz of the reserve, but still a sign of what the market's willing to pay in an open auction ...

 

Riddle me this;

 

Why does an auction site contain listings with an asterik indicating the next bid meets the reserve only after reserves are posted? btw - the shown bid just happens to be one bid increment below the reserve!

 

Edwin

[truthAndSoulBaby]

Riddle me this;

 

Why does an auction site contain listings with an asterik indicating the next bid meets the reserve only after reserves are posted? btw - the shown bid just happens to be one bid increment below the reserve!

 

Edwin

 

i think the interesting riddle is that of the human need to be validated, in one's life and this hobby, alike...

 

in the last two Heritage auctions, i've been interested in two pieces that got the chandelier. If I wasn't watching closely, I would have thought they just got bid up in the last few minutes of the internet bidding, and fortuitously hit the increment right below reserve...however, once i discovered this, i stayed away until there was at least TWO bids...why? [note: myself and another collector talked to JH@HA and he agreed to change the wording of the *** language to make this scenario more clear].

 

i don't know how comicconnect (nor russ cochrane) reserve auctions work, but i thought both the supes and tec were bid up to the above-listed dollar values. if so, i would take those hammer prices as "best guess" at what the market's willing to pay for those two types of pieces. and sometimes that's what i need to work with, a "best guess", so i can get me my doggone validation, dangit.

 

so again, i'm not disagreeing with anyone's skepticism about the validity of prices at "reserve not met" auctions, but i still think it is a useful number to have recorded, but as a footnote, given nothing else...and the rest of this discussion is interesting anyway, so i thank you for that

[PokerKid]

If the reserves are posted, shill bidding isn't needed. Anyone who wants can safely stick in a bid for a thrill, to track it, or just hope to see a piece sold. Human nature will get a fair number of people to place bids for the heck of it if there is no danger in actually winning.

[ashrael]

Added Ha.com 11/15/2011 and 11/16/2011 Items

 

 

Line Art Covers ($100K+):

 

$380,000 (2010): Weird Science-Fantasy #29 (Frank Frazetta)

$239,000 (2011): Detective Comics #67 (Jerry Robinson)

$200,000 (2008): Weird Fantasy #16 (Wally Wood)

$195,500 (2005): Batman #11 (Fred Ray, Jerry Robinson)

$167,300 (2011): Amazing Spider-Man #49 (John Romita Sr)

$119,500 (2011): Adventure Comics #73 (Jack Kirby/Joe Simon)

$101,700 (2006): Amazing Spider-Man #43 (John Romita Sr)

$101,575 (2010): Daredevil #188 (Frank Miller)

$101,575 (2007): Mr. Natural #1 (Robert Crumb)

$101,575 (2011): Action Comics #46 (Fred Ray)

$100,625 (2002): Famous Funnies #213 (Frank Frazetta)

 

Big Sales that are up there: Giant Size X-Men #1; Famous Funnies #215; Avengers #93; Amazing Spider-Man #300 (2011)

 

Did Not Meet Reserve: Superman #14 cover at $402,000 (2010) and Detective Comics #69 cover at $213,000 (2010).

 

Line Art Interiors ($50K+):

 

$448,125 (2011): Batman: The Dark Knight #3 [page 10] (Frank Miller)

$214,819 (2010): Tintin 1939/06/22 [2 pages] (307,785€ for pair ~ $429,637 for pair)

$88,500 (2011) Amazing Spider-Man 50 [page 8] (John Romita)

$86,250 (2005) Marvel Comics #1 [page 12] (Bill Everett)

$77,675 (2008) Big Comics #1 [page 1] (Robert Crumb)

$65,725 (2010) Journey Into Mystery #83 [page 8] (Jack Kirby, Joe Sinnott)

$65,725 (2011): X-Men #137 [page 44] (John Bryne/Terry Austin)

$53,775 (2008) X-Men #1 [page 11] (Jack Kirby, Paul Reinman)

 

Line Art Recreations ($50K+):

 

$77,675 (2011): Amazing Spider-Man #100 cover recreation (John Romita Sr)

 

Painted Comic Covers ($100K+):

 

$1,067,052 (2008): Tintin in America (764,200€)

$203,150 (2008): Mad #30 [front & back covers] (Norman Mingo)

$110,500 (2006): Creepy #10 [cover - "Beyond the Grave"] (Frank Frazetta)

 

Non-Comic Frazetta Paintings ($100K+):

 

$1,500,000 (2010): "Conan The Destroyer"

$1,000,000 (2009): "Conan the Conqueror"

$251,000 (2008): "Escape on Venus"

$150,000 (2010): "Warrior with Ball and Chain"

$120,750 (2003): "Savage World"

 

Did Not Meet Reserve: "Land of Terror" at $172,500 (2011).

 

 

Do you know of any others? Year, issue, page (if not cover), and total price would be appreciated, along with links to info on the web if available. Thanks!

[bocaratondefense]

Carl Barks duck painting?

 

 

[comix4fun]

Carl Barks duck painting?

 

 

 

I hadn't seen anyone mention it...did one sell for a lot of money or something?

[Bronty]

 

I guess the issue is none of them are purely comic art. Maybe the "non-comic frazetta paintings" s/b expanded to include other comic artists "non-comic" paintings. No reason to include fraz and exclude barks I suppose

[ashrael]

I included Frazetta paintings because I like his work and am interested in what they go for.

 

I will be glad to include Barks paintings, but you guys have to do the initial legwork

[Sardo Numspar]

what's up with Tintin?

[Bronty]

well I am just as lazy but OK here is some prelim info from a quick heritage search http://www.ha.com/common/search_results.php?Nty=1&Ntk=SI_Titles&Ns=Price%7C1&N=0+790+231&Ntt=barks

 

sport of tycoons, 2011, $262,900

vacation panel, 2011, $179,250

business as usual, 2011, $179,250

embarassment of riches, 2010, $161,325

spoiling the concert, 2007, $155,350

dubious doings at dismal downs, 2007, $150,570

a binful of fun, 2010, $143,400

spoiling the concert, 2011, $131,450

tresspassers will be ventilated, 2010, $131,450

christmas composition, 2010, $119,500

this dollar saved my life at whitehorse, 2010, $119,500

return to plain awful, 2007, $119,500

goose egg nugget, 2008, $119,500

wanderers of wonderlands, 2008, $119,500

Scrooge's old castle, 2011, $119,500

red sails in the sunset, 2011, 113,525

dam disaster at money lake, 2011, 2011, $107,550

sherriff of bullet valley, 2011, $107,550

only a poor old duck, 2011, $107,550

voodoo hoodoo, 2011, $101,575

mcduck of duckburg, 2011, $101, 575

nobody's spending, 2011, $101,575

golden cities of cibola, 2011, $101,575

[Mmehdy]

3 million dollars in the last two years plus from kirby cofer collection of barks paintings, I cannot recall any original art collection bring that kind of money, especially in this tough times

[Nexus]

Major Tintin auction from last month:

 

http://www.artcurial.com/en/asp/searchresults.asp?pg=20&ps=18&st=D&sale_no=1956+++#a_10335433

 

Some big results for the OA. Check out the estimates. Six figure results (which would make the "biggest price" list for us) seem to be so routine over there, that they rarely get reported unless a record is set. Of course, nothing compared to more classical art, but still notable for comic art. Their market seems to be doing OK...let's see what happens in 2012.

 

 

[bocaratondefense]

Quite a few large sales in this Tintin auction, as well as the Peyo auction a few months ago. For this kind of list, we would almost need a separate category for the European comic art.

 

 

[Alias]

I wonder how these prices would compare to those in 25 years time. Will these present values be as well received by the next generation of collectors? How many people under 20 even know (or even care) who Neal Adams, John Romita, and Jack Kirby even are? I worked for a schoolboard in Canada and often asked kids between the ages of 11 and 16 if they read comics and often got completely blank faces. Asking if they even recognized the names of the plethora of artists many of us grew up loving was a major stretch. ...As a kid, I eagerly awaited the next issue of Spiderman. I'd race to the newstand (yes, newstand) as I couldn't wait to get my hands on the latest issue. I just don't see that same enthusiasm shared with today's youth.

 

Thoughts?

[Captain Canuck]

I agree the upcoming generation doesn't care. You are better off purchasing what you like and not concerning yourself with whether it will go up in value because it may not.