Richard Rae & The curious case of the Mike Royer light-boxed artworks . . .

[Unca Ben]

Troll....

 

Ignore...

I sure hope you don't mean me, I've never trolled anybody in my life.

[Terry Doyle]

I'm amazed that a few collectors here are even buying into the (insincere) efforts by D*i*c*k to try to work out a proper description for his Royer lightbox jobs.

 

Myself and Glen Gold (patiently and reasonably) advised him of all this last Summer (see the e-mail correspondence I reprinted earlier on in this thread).

 

But I guess it's true . . . you can fool some of the people some of the time.

I wasn't buying into his efforts, I just got caught up in the moment, sorry.

 

No worries, Rae wears people down.

[Terry Doyle]

Troll....

 

Ignore...

I sure hope you don't mean me, I've never trolled anybody in my life.

 

He was referring to Rae.

[Unca Ben]

I'm amazed that a few collectors here are even buying into the (insincere) efforts by D*i*c*k to try to work out a proper description for his Royer lightbox jobs.

 

Myself and Glen Gold (patiently and reasonably) advised him of all this last Summer (see the e-mail correspondence I reprinted earlier on in this thread).

 

But I guess it's true . . . you can fool some of the people some of the time.

I wasn't buying into his efforts, I just got caught up in the moment, sorry.

 

No worries, Rae wears people down.

thanks!

[Terry Doyle]

Here's a posting I found on comicart-l.

 

Hi Everyone,

 

I just wanted to point out that this item on Ebay is not an original piece of Jack Kirby artwork. It is an inked drawing by Mike Royer over a copy of a Jack Kirby drawing.

 

While it's a nicely inked piece by Mike Royer, Jack never penciled this actual drawing.

 

KA-ZAR Original Art Jack Kirby / Royer X-Men Daredevil - eBay (item

3902958545_

 

(http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=390295854556&ssPageName=ADME\

:AAQ:US:1123)

 

 

I have written the seller about this but haven't received a response.

 

Best,

 

David Schwartz

 

No-one here will be surprised to discover that friend Dickie was the would-be seller (before David Schwartz warned-off potential suckers . . . er, sorry, I meant potential buyers).

 

If you manage to get the link to work, you will discover that the 'Kirby/Royer' KA-ZAR art went unsold (communal sigh of relief) . . .

 

 

Another reminder . . .

[Terry Doyle]

I did a search on comicart-l and came across these meassages posted about Dickie Rae (if anyone feels the need to authenticate any of the following, and are members of that list, simply do a search):

 

"I have had dealings with Richard in the past and the last time he posted these items I also sent him an email saying he was misleading and that he needs to clarify exactly what the person is buying. i.e. photocopied Kirby pencils with original inks by Royer.

 

He didn't respond.

 

Jeff"

 

And . . .

 

"I can't tell you how many times Richard Rae would show up in CAF chat trying to pawn off that "Kirby/Royer" pieces to myself, Brian Peck, Drake Tungsten, and others.

 

He was always verrrry cagey when we started asking questions about the art.

 

The guys a snake oil salesman.

 

SKL"

 

Yet another reminder . . .

[Terry Doyle]

I love these Boards

 

First up, a big thank you to "thehumantorch" for alerting Comics General folk to the existence of this thread.

 

Now, I don't have much OA, and I am not a member of Comic Art Fans.

 

I have, however, been "bumping into" Richard Rae for more than 30 years.

 

I've never had any "professional dealings" with Richard, but I do know first hand that the vast majority of his "transactions" end with one party being "disappointed" - and that party is never Richard.

 

Richard has always been a "chancer", who plays fast and loose with the truth and never misses an opportunity to talk himself up. He's a liar and a braggart and here's a concrete example of his inflated sense of self importance.

 

He did not organise the first Comic Convention in Australia.

 

He had a hand in running (disastrously) the fourth.

 

The first two were in Melbourne and the third in Sydney - here's the Wiki.

 

I have no doubt he'll now bluster on about how his was the first "professional" (whatever that means) Convention, and the others just don't count

 

The foregoing is a minor matter, but it goes to the heart of what makes Richard tick.

 

Never mind the truth, it's what advances Richard's cause or improves Richard's profile.

 

Fair Dinkum, he could hide behind a corkscrew, he's that bent.

 

 

Another glowing testimony to remind ourselves of . . .

[Menace]

Terry can I employ your services... ... I know many cheats I need you to expose.

 

This is not a joke.

 

Jake Mackessy

[comix4fun]

Now just relax Terry...I've clearly hit the mark here...once you settle down a little we all can help you mate...that's what friends are for and we are all friends here...have another drink and relax...I'll reply once I see you have settled.

 

 

Do you think this is funny to anyone but yourself?

 

You keep going back to it. It wasn't funny any of the last half dozen times you've used it.

 

I do find it interesting that you continue to use psycho-therapy speak. At many times throughout this thread I thought that may be the only hope for you.

 

Like now, for instance.

 

The only minds you are changing about your activities are the ones of your imaginary legions of fairy tale supporters.

[Mr.Rae]

Terry...I have a CAF GALLERY....I do lots of trade deals with lots of people, some work out and some don't suit either party...with respect I suggest we have are been through this...so it's just part of "dealing".

 

But now YOU need to answer WHY you are charging/offering original art at three times the market price.

 

...people who live in glass houses and all that I guess...at least my mistake was an honest one between Joan and I...BUT YOU well..."you" are just upset that I was not going to take your deal...your coats not so white now that the truth is out.

[Mr.Rae]

...oopps...sorry...with respect I suggest we "all" have been through this at some point...we make offers and they get knocked back and others make offers to us and we knock them back...and sometimes offers are good ones and we take them...this is just the way it is.

[Mr.Rae]

Terry...I have no problem if you just want to "chat" about Walther Matthau...but how about we get back to your charging three times the going rate for the art you want to un-load...at least I am answering any clear questions to me...how about you...?

[Mr.Rae]

comix4fun...I've always been like glass...no secrets mate just honesty...you just picked the wrong side.

[Mr.Rae]

Subject 1: Quotation from Terry re: page #1 – “After some further comments were added to his CAF Royer light-box jobs (effectively complaining about the misleading nature of the pieces), Richard finally re-uploaded the artworks (wiping the negative comments in the process) and amended his descriptions to reflect the fact that Jack Kirby’s hand was not present in the Mike Royer pieces.)

 

Now when Terry contacted me he was quite...let’s say “insistent” that light-boxed art was not “real” art, and while I firmly disagreed with his view I decided to give him the benefit that he deserved for being in the collecting business for so many years and I changed my descriptions...it might be interesting to know that this original complaint from Terry (directly to me and not public) came soon after I declined a trade deal with him regarding some of my other original art that possibly left a bad taste in his mouth and got him a little off-side with me...did this have something to do with his attack on me...?...possibly, I don’t know but it’s a freaky coincidence at best.

 

So even Terry agreed that I complied with his description wishes...and now after so many pages in this chat-room it looks like we have finally “all” agreed on how best to describe light-boxed art, and once again I’m happy to comply wish collectors who possibly know far more than I.

 

Subject 2: Quotation from the Joan email also shown on page #1 – “...he didn’t mention that the pieces were not actually penciled by Kirby until the art was on the way to my house...” the simple fact is that I was hardly home during this trade deal with Joan, that she was pushing and in truth so was I, as soon as I was allowed out of hospital I continued “immediately” correspondence personally and filled in any extra details that I had felt had not been covered extensively or had simply been overlooked by both Joan and I in previous emails.

 

Next quotation from the Joan email shown on page #1 – “...I let it go because I was guilty for not asking enough about what I was acquiring...” This is true, but in truth we were both guilty of not spending enough time on the details of this trade...so here is Joan saying that she is guilty and here is me saying “no” it was both of us...I could have said “fine you said you’re guilty so I’m off any hook BUT I DIDN’T.

 

Next quotation from the Joan email shown on page #1 - “...but as I said, I feel 50% responsible..” Now she feels less guilty but has fallen into how I’m seeing this AND FOR THE FIRST TIME I MIGHT AD...she never complained to me directly about our trade deal once, so up until Terry used her words against me as some kind of weaponed in this chat-room I had no idea Joan was not completely satisfied with our trade deal...it was really quite a shock.

 

At any point from Joan receiving the art from me we could have made an immediate trade-reversal...problem easily fixed...but I knew NOTHING of this or ANY problem until the next year when she had either sold or traded off what art I had sent her and I’m reading her letter in this chat-room.

 

Then Terry is calling me names and accusing me of ripping “people” off...good grief I figured it was some dumb joke.

 

Terry had me so focused that this was the greatest disaster that has ever happened in the world that I did something that I will never do again...I not only caved into his bullying but I executed to solve a deal “publicly” and this sadly eventually put a stop to any chance of fixing Joan’s problem.

 

I treated the matter as a matter of “urgency” as more and more rude, unfair and uncalled for comments were listed in this chat-room...pressuring me to fix the problem or be branded a crook...I treated these accusations as a matter of priority and I insisted that Joan did as well...in hindsight I should have simply fixed everything “privately” with Joan via emails over a number of weeks BUT “some” of you guys just kept attacking and making fun what I coincided to be a very serious situation.

 

Finally I realised that if I had worked the problem out with Joan then Terry would just claim some kind of victory that he had all this power to force a crook to reverse a trade deal that he had absolutely nothing to do with in the first place, or if I didn’t work out the problem with Joan then he would just keep calling me a crook...either way I was still being branded a crook...so with no way to clear the matter up and as Joan did not wish to enter into negotiations to do a reverse trade (something that I was more than happy to do) then the complaint was dropped by me and only kept alive by “some” in this chat-room who are happy to condemn but not willing to admit any responsibility.

 

So put simply...that is the Joan saga.

 

Humanly poor judgement on both our parts BUT no criminal action.

 

I hope this helps...next questions please...

 

Kindest regards

 

Richard

 

P.S. This is a question for Terry...what kind of price were you looking for to sell some of that nice original art you own...we both know that you had tripled the market price on ALL of the art you were selling...and you call me names

 

 

[Mr.Rae]

Isn't amazing...now that the light-box Kirby/Royer problem has been solved and as Terry and his "clan" have not continued to "attempt" to fault me on my actions with Joan (after my posting)...all they do now is sling mud...sorry boys but it's not sticking...now YOU have some questions to reply too mate...take your time "over-pricer"...please explain why you were selling original art at three times is market value...well...

[koollectablz]

At first I thought you were just a crook after reading this thread. Theres plenty of them around after all.

 

Now I think you may actually be insane.

[Mr.Rae]

Yes...I guess it is insane to go up against bullies koollectable...but some of us have to have the balls...

[koollectablz]

Yeah, but 'going up against bullies' would usually infer that you had right on your side or at the very least a valid opinion.

 

You have neither.

[Weird Paper]

Isn't amazing...now that the light-box Kirby/Royer problem has been solved and as Terry and his "clan" have not continued to "attempt" to fault me on my actions with Joan (after my posting)...all they do now is sling mud...sorry boys but it's not sticking...now YOU have some questions to reply too mate...take your time "over-pricer"...please explain why you were selling original art at three times is market value...well...

There's nothing unethical about asking any price you want for art. If it seems high, yet somebody buys it, there's your market value. Misrepresenting art in sales and trades is something else entirely. I think you probably know that--you just enjoy being the center of attention here. It's really a little sad.

[Pirate]

You are a complete buffoon. I think the proper term is Turnip. There is a difference between selling ORIGINAL art and selling undisclosed fakes/forgeries. Who cares what people price their ORIGINAL art at, but I do want to know who is not being truthful like you so I can avoid.

 

Have you met Rob Granito before, he's a nice guy. You too would love each other. You're looking for cheap artists to rip off for your publications and he will work for a ride to tennessee right now.