• 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.

"Yellow Brick Road" artist pleas for Elton John to give back artwork

Started by Ant-Man,

30 posts in this topic

MR SigS

MR SigS

Posted
Posted

 

Probably because he can sell it again for more money

Yeah, asking him to "give" it back is pretty silly. I just purchased some books from a Boarder. I'd be kinda miffed if he asked me to just "give" them back.

If EJ wants to give it back, that's his choice. But if not, so what? It's his. So what if he's rich? He's earned it.

That's just my 2c

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buyatari

buyatari

Posted
Posted

Perhaps the artist felt he was paid only for the image and not the artwork. If the artist is now on hard times EJ could issue a print signed by both of them and split it with the illustrator. I doubt if EJ still has the artwork after all this time that he will give it up now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DiceX

DiceX

Posted
Posted

I can tell with certainty that 14.29% of the people that read that article are insufficiently_thoughtful_persons.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
koollectablz

koollectablz

Posted
Posted

If EJ paid £430 for it back then he's entitled to do whatever the hell he wants with it.

 

That was a HUGE amount of money then. I mean we're talking a years wage for some people.

 

EJ could offer to sell it back to him for FMV...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
seanfingh

seanfingh

Posted
Posted
If EJ paid £430 for it back then he's entitled to do whatever the hell he wants with it.

 

That was a HUGE amount of money then. I mean we're talking a years wage for some people.

 

EJ could offer to sell it back to him for FMV...

 

Let's not get carried away. $688, even in 1973, was only a year's wage in a third world country. I'm not sure anyone could live on $688 a year in 1873.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bronze_rules

bronze_rules

Posted
Posted
If EJ paid £430 for it back then he's entitled to do whatever the hell he wants with it.

 

That was a HUGE amount of money then. I mean we're talking a years wage for some people.

 

EJ could offer to sell it back to him for FMV...

 

Let's not get carried away. $688, even in 1973, was only a year's wage in a third world country. I'm not sure anyone could live on $688 a year in 1873.

 

or 3000+ copies of bronze comics at cover price. :cloud9:

Comic Book inflation translation-- about 12,000 in today's dollars.

Good fetch for the artist even now (and who knew if it would be worth anything today; we all know hindsight is 20/20).

 

I don't see any reason for Elton to want to give it back for free, other than some very significant personal reason (even then...).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
COI

COI

Posted
Posted
If EJ paid £430 for it back then he's entitled to do whatever the hell he wants with it.

 

That was a HUGE amount of money then. I mean we're talking a years wage for some people.

 

EJ could offer to sell it back to him for FMV...

 

Let's not get carried away. $688, even in 1973, was only a year's wage in a third world country. I'm not sure anyone could live on $688 a year in 1873.

 

Technically, since he said "some people", and since more than half the population makes $2 or less a day presently, his statement holds up. :baiting:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MR SigS

MR SigS

Posted
Posted
If EJ paid £430 for it back then he's entitled to do whatever the hell he wants with it.

 

That was a HUGE amount of money then. I mean we're talking a years wage for some people.

 

EJ could offer to sell it back to him for FMV...

 

Let's not get carried away. $688, even in 1973, was only a year's wage in a third world country. I'm not sure anyone could live on $688 a year in 1873.

 

Technically, since he said "some people", and since more than half the population makes $2 or less a day presently, his statement holds up. :baiting:

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites
seanfingh

seanfingh

Posted
Posted
If EJ paid £430 for it back then he's entitled to do whatever the hell he wants with it.

 

That was a HUGE amount of money then. I mean we're talking a years wage for some people.

 

EJ could offer to sell it back to him for FMV...

 

Let's not get carried away. $688, even in 1973, was only a year's wage in a third world country. I'm not sure anyone could live on $688 a year in 1873.

 

Technically, since he said "some people", and since more than half the population makes $2 or less a day presently, his statement holds up. :baiting:

 

Your technical victory is simmering in a bland broth of weaksauce. Enjoy it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
COI

COI

Posted
Posted
If EJ paid £430 for it back then he's entitled to do whatever the hell he wants with it.

 

That was a HUGE amount of money then. I mean we're talking a years wage for some people.

 

EJ could offer to sell it back to him for FMV...

 

Let's not get carried away. $688, even in 1973, was only a year's wage in a third world country. I'm not sure anyone could live on $688 a year in 1873.

 

Technically, since he said "some people", and since more than half the population makes $2 or less a day presently, his statement holds up. :baiting:

 

Your technical victory is simmering in a bland broth of weaksauce. Enjoy it.

 

And this response is simmering in a salty broth of butthurt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
seanfingh

seanfingh

Posted
Posted
If EJ paid £430 for it back then he's entitled to do whatever the hell he wants with it.

 

That was a HUGE amount of money then. I mean we're talking a years wage for some people.

 

EJ could offer to sell it back to him for FMV...

 

Let's not get carried away. $688, even in 1973, was only a year's wage in a third world country. I'm not sure anyone could live on $688 a year in 1873.

 

Technically, since he said "some people", and since more than half the population makes $2 or less a day presently, his statement holds up. :baiting:

 

Your technical victory is simmering in a bland broth of weaksauce. Enjoy it.

 

And this response is simmering in a salty broth of butthurt.

 

You wish. It is braising in a flavorless stock of disappointment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MrBedrock

MrBedrock

Posted
Posted
If EJ paid £430 for it back then he's entitled to do whatever the hell he wants with it.

 

That was a HUGE amount of money then. I mean we're talking a years wage for some people.

 

EJ could offer to sell it back to him for FMV...

 

Let's not get carried away. $688, even in 1973, was only a year's wage in a third world country. I'm not sure anyone could live on $688 a year in 1873.

 

Technically, since he said "some people", and since more than half the population makes $2 or less a day presently, his statement holds up. :baiting:

 

Your technical victory is simmering in a bland broth of weaksauce. Enjoy it.

 

And this response is simmering in a salty broth of butthurt.

 

You wish. It is braising in a flavorless stock of disappointment.

This whole exchange is flatulating in a gelatinous mold of -pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
COI

COI

Posted
Posted
If EJ paid £430 for it back then he's entitled to do whatever the hell he wants with it.

 

That was a HUGE amount of money then. I mean we're talking a years wage for some people.

 

EJ could offer to sell it back to him for FMV...

 

Let's not get carried away. $688, even in 1973, was only a year's wage in a third world country. I'm not sure anyone could live on $688 a year in 1873.

 

Technically, since he said "some people", and since more than half the population makes $2 or less a day presently, his statement holds up. :baiting:

 

Your technical victory is simmering in a bland broth of weaksauce. Enjoy it.

 

And this response is simmering in a salty broth of butthurt.

 

You wish. It is braising in a flavorless stock of disappointment.

 

I imagine it wasn't as disappointing as waking up at 2pm in a pile of greasy filet o fish wrappers, next to the girl who works the midnight drive-thru shift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing