1985-1989 Coin Market = 2000-2004 Comic Market?

[Aman619]

Okay. So how much does "expert research/testimony" cost?

 

Lets end this once and for all: Lets collect the cost to hire Gene to do a real professional reasearch paper. And hire economists and others we can suggest to read and evaluate it. Perhaps one of you can get it to an Economics Professor at a respected University. Then we will all have done our best to see whats what. It would be worth a few dollars each to actually get a professional opinion on Gene's 'professional' opinion.

 

How much will it take: $500? $1000? $20 each... think of it as 'insurance' against the value of your collections.

[Foolkiller]

how much does expert witness testimony cost? well... $1k isn't even close. If you're talking about an extensively researched report for all the time and money put in, Gene himself would have to come up with a figure.

 

I'll give you an example: a narcotics expert who does absolutely no research or prep and relies basically on their experience to testify (ones used by the defense) charge about $500... for one morning or afternoon. If the case goes a whole day (i.e. he has to wait a whole day, not working the whole day) he gets $800. That's one day without any real research, just listening to the testimony. I'm sure it's worse for experts on the civil side.

 

Now who wants to start a collection for Gene to do extensive research. Everyone get ready to pony up $100 each. minimum.

[FFB]

I don't care whether he does a full blown analysis either. He can post whatever he wants. If you go back and read where this argument started, you'll see it had nothing to do with my picking on his analysis as unscholarly. It started when Gene got on his high horse and started calling people names and accusing them of being "intellectually dishonest." That is what annoyed me.

 

My point was, and always has been, that if he's going to act like everyone who doesn't agree with him is an insufficiently_thoughtful_person, then he should back it up. If not, then he has no right to denigrate people who don't buy his unsupported theory as though it is gospel.

 

football:

 

dude, you can't compare an expert witness testimony to Gene's posting of a graph on an internet message board. I deal with expert witnesses everyday as well... and I wouldn't expect their data to be presented in quite the same fashion in an informal setting as I would if they were prepping for a case.

 

I want to stay out of the arena of personal insults when engaging in debates, but I'm not a fan of using this analogy to rip on Gene.

[Marvelous]

In the end, the only opinion that matters before buying a comic for pleasure or investment is your OWN.

 

I choose not to believe the hype of the TGC. There may very well be some corrections that take place on certain parts of the comic book market or on specific hyped books (on a small scale), but that does not add up to an industry wide crash. Sure there is a risk in everything, but you can eliminate a lot of the risk by making educated choices. Choices like not buying 100s of copies of any hyped modern book (too risky and most cases) or buying any hyped book leading up to a movie release of the character of that book. A little common sense will go a long way if you don't have the time to do deep investigative work like some board members.

[FFB]

Most of the economists who perform market analyses in my geographic area (SF Bay Area) charge between $350 and $500 an hour. But they have PhDs and considerable skill in their subject areas and are excellent testifying witnesses. Their non-testifying research personnel charge about $150-200 per hour.

 

how much does expert witness testimony cost? well... $1k isn't even close. If you're talking about an extensively researched report for all the time and money put in, Gene himself would have to come up with a figure.

 

I'll give you an example: a narcotics expert who does absolutely no research or prep and relies basically on their experience to testify (ones used by the defense) charge about $500... for one morning or afternoon. If the case goes a whole day (i.e. he has to wait a whole day, not working the whole day) he gets $800. That's one day without any real research, just listening to the testimony. I'm sure it's worse for experts on the civil side.

 

Now who wants to start a collection for Gene to do extensive research. Everyone get ready to pony up $100 each. minimum.

[Marvelous]

Most of the economists who perform market analyses in my geographic area (SF Bay Area) charge between $350 and $500 an hour. But they have PhDs and considerable skill in their subject areas and are excellent testifying witnesses. Their non-testifying research personnel charge about $150-200 per hour.

 

Put me down for $100 donation to the cause. NOT

[dam60]

I've made this offer before, and I'll do it again. Give me five grand. I'll guarantee you the risk free rate of return (whatever the six month T-Bill rate is), and you get everything above that up to eight grand in six months.

 

Everything OVER eight grand I get to keep. I'll do it solely flipping books. I'll happily and merrily make my cash this way.

 

FD - help me out here:

 

you are saying that if I give you five grand you will GUARANTEE me the 6 month t-bill. Everything up to $8K in 6 months you give to me, everything post $8K you keep? So, if I understand you - you will give me risk free roughly 1% annualized and the potential for 120% annualized return??

 

Dude, why don't you just take out a home equity loan or run up your credit card debt a bit? You could get a nice home equity loan for a lot more than the $5K that you are asking for or you could just get some cash from your credit card. Even CASH from your credit card I have never heard of them taking more than 25% interest . . .

 

 

DAM

[comicwiz]

I don't care whether he does a full blown analysis either. He can post whatever he wants. If you go back and read where this argument started, you'll see it had nothing to do with my picking on his analysis as unscholarly. It started when Gene got on his high horse and started calling people names and accusing them of being "intellectually dishonest." That is what annoyed me.

 

FFB, I have to agree with your overall opinion, but not to the extent of accusing Gene of lashing out at members for being intellectually bankrupt.

 

Most debate around crash postulations and theories have historically denigrated into bouts of name-calling and insults. Unfortunately, Gene ends up co-opting a defensive position, and unfairly inherits the brunt of the criticism.

 

To follow-up on what you have already mentioned, the one thing that really bothers me in every single discussion around an impending comic crash, is how in every discussion, this contrived concern for people who have spent beyond their means, and bought the farm begins to take shape. This "suckers/losers" finger pointing; the speculator who ought to be tarred and feathered is a movie reel which has been kept rolling, and a story too faregone and charred for consumption.

 

Everytime I hear this, it makes me think of the smoldering example where government officials, suffering from a "God-complex", decide to impose health warnings on cigarettes packaging to save lives. Now I am not a smoker, and I do realize the risks of second hand smoke. But government policy that staggers around health-issues, and examines only the surface of the real problems in society are the first to pound their fist on the podium, demanding change for the sake of humanity.

 

So why doesn't the bottle of Jack Daniels have an image of a man/woman sporting a black-eye, or an image of the grim reaper on the label -- a warning of sorts that drinking may lead to spousal abuse, fits of rage/violence, or worse, death? One can certainly draw some interesting statistical correlations between people with drinking problems engaging in spousal abuse, and acts of violent behaviour. Just ask any of the forumites on this forum who have at one time or another worked as doormen or bouncers.

 

The reason is because legislators and policy-makers don't give a [!@#%^&^]! They are only mandated to aggregate support from the electorate, and sustain that support to help them get past the post in upcoming elections. Its also a one-two punch on their purse strings as both tobacco and alcohol make-up the largest sources of revenue in the form of SIN taxes.

 

Its interesting that the same statistics which inform them of birth defects from pregnant mothers exposed to first or second-hand smoke, also reveal the rise in spousal abuse, and the effects of alcohol abuse in the family. An alarming number of people are killed every year through drinking/driving, abusal related, or acts of violence stemming from alcohol consumption.

 

And its one thing to shut-out this kind of government hypocrisy which force-feeds their so-called concern about my well-being, but another thing altogether when its reduced to this juvenile mentality that Tony still lives with his parents at the age of 30, while Todd moved out at 18, drives a Porsche, and lives his life, one cheque away from bankruptcy.

 

Who cares, and why is it so important for us to pass judgement on other people?

 

The reason why we congregate on these forums, aside from the thrill of engaging in behaviour, is because we are all, in some form or another, comic hobbyists. Its not to win any kind of popularity contest. Lets put aside the judgement calls, the hypocrisy, and talk-down antics which have an unusual way of prompting an "us" and "them" ritualistic session -- this is not a cult congregating, but a place we come to talk comics.

[FFB]

CW,

 

Since this is a really long thread, below is the post from Gene that started this. The italicized portion consists of several bits of a prior post of mine that he cut up and put back together into a straw man that he used to accuse me in a snide way of being too intellectually dishonest and lacking the "rigor" to admit that he is correct, as well as calling me a "fanboy," which I take it is the comic book dork equivalent of being called a insufficiently_thoughtful_person. He was way out of line.

 

If Gene wants to stick to the topic and defend his theory with or without actual analysis and fact, that's fine with me. But he has to be a man and accept what criticism comes his way if he does so. And if he's going to insult me in a personal way for taking part in the flip side of the debate, I think I am justified in pointing out that what he has done is wrong. If he will stop doing it and go back to debating whether the crash will occur without slinging insults at me, then I am happy to drop the whole thing.

 

I actually enjoy the Crash debate on whole and think it's a worthwhile topic, which was why I was reading this thread (and all of the other crash threads) in the first place. I was leaving the hobby in 1994 when the last crash happened so I've seen for a fact that it can occur under certain circumstances. I agree with the general notion that there will be mini-crashes along the way that are specific to various sub-genres, such as CGC 9.8 moderns and the like.

 

I am more skeptical that there will be a crash in the HG pre-1965 silver age market and the HG golden age market because of scarcity and interest, but I do have a hard time seeing the prices continue to rise indefinitely beyond the levels they are approaching. I think that the $10,000, $50,000, and $100,000 levels are real psychological barriers to comic pricing and as certain books reach those levels, the prices for them will stagnate for a few years. There is a big question whether those holding the books will dump them. This part I don't agree will happen, simply because there are enough well-heeled individuals out there who will want to pay what it takes for a CGC 9.6 Amazing Fantasy #15 so that the seller will at least break even on his investment, and likely make a small profit with each successive sale.

 

My greatest skepticism for the great crash theory is the notion that a crash of one segment will necessarily resound across all segments of the hobby. I am not saying that it won't happen, but I think it is far from inevitable. The main reason is that the buyers in one segment are not usually the same buyers in another segment. The guy who is buying CGC 9.8 moderns probably doesn't know what the last copy of Amazing Spider-Man #1 in CGC 9.6 sold for and won't care if the next copy sells for $50,000 less than the last one.

 

Anyway, let's get this thread back on topic, shall we?

 

Comics are not commodities...Comics are not even fungible...All of this discussion about comparisons to the coin market or stock market is interesting, but I don't buy the basic premise because I don't believe that anyone who believes these theories has spent half as much time analyzing the differences between these markets as they have analyzing why their theory "might" be right.

 

Spoken like a true fanboy. Of course there are major differences between comics and coins, and I don't think the comic market will follow the exact same path as coins. However, there are also uncanny similarities in the two markets' behavior to date following the introduction of the slabbing phenomenon. Are we to just ignore these because we, personally, think coins are boring and comics are exciting? I'm sorry, but I don't buy into this comic-centric view that comics are some sort of high artform that can inspire nostalgia and passions that other hobbies can't hope to compete with. That is ludicrous, particularly when you see how much money is being shelled out in other hobbies versus our own. We all know FF is a staunch defender of the comic market, but he's intellectually honest and rigorous enough to admit that the comparison with coins is a more than fair comparison. Are you?

 

As for stocks, real estate and other non-collectible markets, of course there are even greater differences. But if you look at them without your comc blinders on, you'll realize that they are driven by the same mass investor participation, greed and fear that drives comics and any other market. Keep an open mind and the truth will set you free.

 

Gene

[delekkerste]

 

My God...just how thin is your skin, anyway? Didn't we all hear enough of your whining & crying in that AF15 PLOD thread already? And stop trying to play the blameless victim here...you've thrown more than your fair share of mud from on top of your own high horse.

[BachelorOfComix]

 

My God...just how thin is your skin, anyway? Didn't we all hear enough of your whining & crying in that AF15 PLOD thread already? And stop trying to play the blameless victim here...you've thrown more than your fair share of mud from on top of your own high horse.

[Marvelous]

I don't know why everyone just can't be non-confrontational like me.

 

[BachelorOfComix]

I don't know why everyone just can't be non-confrontational like me.

 

And me too. All this bickering kills me.

[14 of spades]

...there are enough well-heeled individuals out there who will want to pay what it takes for a CGC 9.6 Amazing Fantasy #15 so that the seller will at least break even on his investment, and likely make a small profit with each successive sale.

 

this is EXACTLY the type of attitude that leads to speculative bubbles. if a speculator is SURE he'll at least break even on a purchase, then there's NO RISK in him dumping tens of thousands on a funny book.

 

where were all those speculators duing the mid 1990s, when books could be bought at a fraction of the cost - when the economy was good, and no one seemed to care about comics?

 

u are directly stating that (with certain key books) prices can only go up, higher and higher, forever and ever, that someone will ALWAYS want to pay $(X + 1) dollars for a book when the book sold for $X at the last sale.

 

if that were the case - why didn't those "well heeled" buyers step in and buy the book when it was only $(X - 1) to buy it?

 

seems like a pretty fantastic comic-driven world we live in. how wonderful...

 

[delekkerste]

 

Gene

[14 of spades]

 

Gene

 

 

ur the #1 poster on these boards!

[FFB]

Really? Show me my mud slinging. Show me where I have jumped on forum members with personal insults because they disagreed with me. You can't because it hasn't happened.

 

As for the AF 15 thread which you've now referenced multiple times, I don't think I carried on in an unreasonable manner. Here's a link to the thread. AF15 9.6 PLOD 99.9% of the discussion involves my initial buy order for the book, the discussion of whether I should have the restoration removed or not, and then later, issues about how Comiclink's order system is set up. After I found out that the book had been sold to someone else, I was unhappy about the way the transaction worked and I said so without excessive whining in one or two posts, and after the evening that I found out that I hadn't won the book, I pretty much dropped that aspect of the issue. Is this the same thing as hurling personal insults at a forum member (rather than defending my views on the merits) because he disagreed with me? Nope.

 

 

My God...just how thin is your skin, anyway? Didn't we all hear enough of your whining & crying in that AF15 PLOD thread already? And stop trying to play the blameless victim here...you've thrown more than your fair share of mud from on top of your own high horse.

[BachelorOfComix]

 

ur the #1 poster on these boards!

Greggy's #1

[FFB]

Read the rest of my post. Focus on the part where I said that I am not stating that a crash "won't" occur. Try also not to take small snippets out of context.

 

...there are enough well-heeled individuals out there who will want to pay what it takes for a CGC 9.6 Amazing Fantasy #15 so that the seller will at least break even on his investment, and likely make a small profit with each successive sale.

 

this is EXACTLY the type of attitude that leads to speculative bubbles. if a speculator is SURE he'll at least break even on a purchase, then there's NO RISK in him dumping tens of thousands on a funny book.

 

where were all those speculators duing the mid 1990s, when books could be bought at a fraction of the cost - when the economy was good, and no one seemed to care about comics?

 

u are directly stating that (with certain key books) prices can only go up, higher and higher, forever and ever, that someone will ALWAYS want to pay $(X + 1) dollars for a book when the book sold for $X at the last sale.

 

if that were the case - why didn't those "well heeled" buyers step in and buy the book when it was only $(X - 1) to buy it?

 

seems like a pretty fantastic comic-driven world we live in. how wonderful...

 

[jbud73]

Still at it are we gents Hmmm, this is an interesting situation, I really enjoy reading what both FantasyFootballBono posts (though I think he needs a new handle, or an acronym abbreviation FFB - ya I think that will about do it) as well, Gene usually has some of the better points of view which are posted with supporting arguements, empirical evidence/speculation and sound logical priciple. So to see them both has me scratching my head.

 

See personally I think Gene was pointing out that FFB is a collector and this skews his perspective a bit from time to time - I know it does mine, or I wouldnt have bought some of the things I have over the past year. I still give Gene props for putting out some sobering ideas about a hobby on a Comic fanboy board and putting up with the arrow slinging that inevitably ensues from it.

 

What do I think about the crash, hmmmm, well I think it probably wont come in one all encompassing swoop like some of the ppl like Dr. Banner et al have sat waiting for and then used humourously to discredit its discussion. I happen to think Banner is a good guy too and is fast becoming my fav seller, even though we may not 100% agree on everything, most ppl won't. But I think that the law of diminshing returns has to come in here at some point and even though I agree with the poster who said that they hate it when ppl tar and feather others for stupid purchases that throw all others out of perspective.

 

Its kinda like baseball owners in the majors - they play in an uneven market and bemoan when such and such an owner goes out and gives a player 100s of millions of dollars, cause it throws the market out of whack, and then they go and sign a different player to 100 millions themsleves. Some however, cant because of budgets etc. Is this hypocritical business practise hurting MLB, I think we could say that it is. And everyonce in a while a strike ensues, or a lock out, or attendence goes down or a player is a huge bust. And ppl start pointing fingers and then it fixes itself and happens all over again. Now baseball has the mechanisms to self regulate like the NFL, but it doesnt, comics on the other hand dont. But there are parallels here and Im sure that the bubble will burst, what bubble, when and for how long, who knows.

 

For me as a collector I jus really want one thing, to get the books I want at the best possible deals - and right now I have come to the conclusion that it is NOT the best time to buy the 5-8 slabbed copies of books I want and will put my collecting energies elsewhere. Its not an easy thing to do. But Im just an average collector, I spend a few thousand lets say between $5,000 and $10,000 a year on back issues. Will I ever own a 9.6 ASM #1, probably not, will I ever have a complete set of Uncanny X-men in VF or better, ya I think I probably will (8 issues to go). So for me its not so much holding the bag as maximizing my buying power. Some ppl get excited about a movie say DD, I lament it, because the speculation will drive up the price on books I would have purchased anyway. THE PRICE WILL COME DOWN, MAYBE CRASH INDUCED MAYBE NOT - It probably wont bottom out, but sometimes you just have to have patience, a tough thing but NECESSARY.

 

So will the doom and end of comics ever happen, nope, I think the 70 odd years of existence indicated that comics have passed the test of time and wont go out to pasture any time soon. But the market will fluctuate and it will have severe up turns and down turns (call them crashes if you will) me I'm just gonna use my knowledge and gut to buy when best the books Ive always wanted, I wish you all luck in doing the same.

 

back to work