Nov Heritage auction

[Claudio]

i know when I buy a piece, I do think of the financial consequences of that decision. However, I think that most people on here talk about the money part because it is a way of keeping score. "So and so page cost x amount. I wonder if so and so page 2 costs 1.5x!" I don't think many people here see art being sold at 50k and expect it to appreciate to 100k in two years. I may be wrong but I don't think that is the case. Anyway, that's just my 2 cents. I'm not trying to argue with you... maybe just trying to offer and explanation.

[aardvark88]

I don't think anyone has mentioned the Cgc influence on OA yet. Due to the rapid leaps in SA comic slabs, the hi-end OA dealers all jacked up their asking prices as they had to be scaled in relationship to "common" SA or BA comics in Cgc 9.2 up. Else collectors are cashing in their Cgc 9.4, 9.6, 9.8 at various auctions (cConnect, cLink, HA. Pedigree Auctions, eBay, etc.) at heady valuations and looking to cycle their hobby dollars into one of a kind OA, illos, paintings, etc.

[Bronty]

that's a good point Allan.

 

Actually I think that's two points in the one. The relative value argument to common slabs, and also the increased liquidity from internet sales (of whatever else that collector might own, including art).

 

Add to that the internet making it so much easier to learn about & locate & collect art, and its just become a completely different landscape and infinitely better IMO in all ways except price.

[artcollector9]

Ruben-- YOU said" And people wonder why this list had the reputation of being all about the money in the hobby and no one really caring about the art, just the value."

 

I defended Rick and said that not only does he care about art as all of us who collect art do, but what's unfair is your sarcasm disparaging anyone who discusses or is concerned with price/value.

 

It isn't either/or. But at these prices, we need to consider BOTH.

 

I pointed out that if one don't have a wife and children, one can be less, or unconcerned about value and investment, because they live for themselves.

 

Price IS relevant. A page that's 20,000 ought to be 2X better than one that's 10K, although that's incredibly hard to quantify. And it had better be able to hold its value or increase in the future.

 

I hope this doesn't sound angry-- I'm not angry. But we can be concerned with price and still be 'purists'.

 

Rob

 

 

 

 

 

[J.Sid]

A lot of Thor covers to go along with that Kirby Thor splash... somebody leaving the hobby and liquidating their collection?

 

 

[CollectingFool]

I defended Rick and said that not only does he care about art as all of us who collect art do, but what's unfair is your sarcasm disparaging anyone who discusses or is concerned with price/value.

 

Actually that wasn't sarcasm. I was pointing out very "matter of fact" that the list does have the reputation I mentioned among certain people and that posts like that are the reason why.

 

Like I said, it may not have been the intention but at the end of that post it sounds like he's trying to decide what to buy in the future based solely on possible return. I understand the need to understand values. I don't disparage anyone for wanting to know if they're throwing their money into a black hole. I certainly avoid doing it. Hell, I spend a lot of time every week helping others determine values for both buyers and sellers. Practically wrote a thesis yesterday for a collector that was planning on possibly parting with a piece and wanted to make sure he wouldn't get hosed. I don't think we've ever met and probably only know each other by reputation.

 

I get into these types of "misunderstandings" when discussing etiquette and ethics too. Certain things seem obvious to me but my standards seem to be getting outdated as the majority (at least here) seems to think otherwise. I think public dissections of prices like we commonly see here are crass. I think it taints the hobby and detracts from all the other reasons to be in the hobby. Certainly sucks the fun out of it for me. I'm not angry either just hoping to point things in a different direction. Probably just spitting into the wind though.

[Bronty]

I think public dissections of prices like we commonly see here are crass. I think it taints the hobby and detracts from all the other reasons to be in the hobby. Certainly sucks the fun out of it for me. I'm not angry either just hoping to point things in a different direction. Probably just spitting into the wind though.

 

But public dissections help people understand value and help, at least in part, avoid the need for the private dissertations that you are talking about and take part in. Wouldn't you rather have one public discussion than a hundred private ones?

 

When people are having to pay extraordinary sums of money for comic art these things are on their mind.

[Claudio]

I think public dissections of prices like we commonly see here are crass.

In what way? Seriously, I am not being sarcastic.

[CollectingFool]

But public dissections help people understand value and help, at least in part, avoid the need for the private dissertations that you are talking about and take part in. Wouldn't you rather have one public discussion than a hundred private ones?

 

No I wouldn't. This is dragging on more than I wanted but I want to answer these questions as they seem like honest attempts to understand not just arguing:

 

Most times these conversations are superficial. You discuss value here but it only covers about 30% or at best 40% of the story. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing and people can get hurt just as easily having part of the story as they can with no story at all.

 

If you do it right it's a full education. Auction vs retail vs trade/cash value. History of prices and why those prices were what they were. Full analysis of the artist and what sells better and why. Plus there's the personal back and forth and networking that is ALWAYS better than random opinions by people who may like to talk or show what little they know than impart truly valuable information.

 

And to answer two posts in one, why do I think it's crass? Because you're boiling down something other people love and value to dollars. Why is it crass? It just is. Speaking of money publicly is perceived as crass among many people here in the US. Maybe it's a regional thing.

 

 

[pinupcartoonguy]

I don't think talking about the value of art is crass, but I do agree with Ruben that often this board treats OA as nothing more than a commodity. They may as well be stock certificates of pieces of real estate.

 

It's also one of the main reasons I'm slowly disassociating myself from the hobby. I'm at the point where I'm pretty happy with what I have, and what I don't have, is just not affordable, especially given that I have multiple college tuition to pay for on the horizon.

[Bronty]

I don't think talking about the value of art is crass, but I do agree with Ruben that often this board treats OA as nothing more than a commodity.

 

Well from reading that it almost sounds like you guys put OA on a pedestal and treat it as some sort of virginal deity whose purity is assaulted by discussions of her value.

 

This is not high brow art and it never was (as our buddy Dan F would say, its better). Comic OA is ultimately just a bunch of illustrations that artists were paid to do, to sell a product. It was ultimately mercenary in its creation and it is bought and sold the same way it was created, and for my I don't see the problem with that. Maybe that's because I'm more of a newb than you guys, but for my part I love the discussions on value because they help me learn

 

 

[artcollector9]

We do walk about money in America more than they do (publicly) in Asia and Europe.

 

People will ask you what you do for a living for example, and extrapolate your salary here, while in Japan for example, it would be considered rude to ask the same thing.

 

SO I see your point Reuben... but I guess with records being set before our eyes, and because prices are now in the hundreds of thousands if not millions (comics at least, art soon to follow), it's fascinating to vent ones views among fellow collectors, and to hear what others think.

 

Rob

[artcollector9]

That's TALK about money...!

[AvengersFan]

I think discussing values/prices and giving our opinions on the market can help new collectors avoid getting ripped off by the "sharks" in our fine hobby, who like to prey on the newer art collectors by "taking them under thier wing" and "helping them aquire nice material at a good price".

Jay

[rrichards]

What we are really talking about here is money AND art and that’s O.K. We live in a consumer based, free enterprise system that runs on money. Money is NOT evil, it is just a commodity for which we exchange our energies. Anyone that tries to grab the “higher ground” by suggesting that money is Satan and his name should not be mentioned ,from whatever country they are from, is not seeing the whole picture and being a bit condescending.

It’s the world we live in and it’s not so bad!

It’ s the old “Art versus Commerce” discussion and it’s been going on for years.

It’s all good!

[CollectingFool]

It's obvious the more vocal members of this group do not agree. This will be my last post on this thread to try to explain my point:

 

Well from reading that it almost sounds like you guys put OA on a pedestal and treat it as some sort of virginal deity whose purity is assaulted by discussions of her value.

 

Anyone that tries to grab the “higher ground” by suggesting that money is Satan and his name should not be mentioned ,from whatever country they are from, is not seeing the whole picture and being a bit condescending.

 

As I tried to explain in my other posts the issue isn't SOLELY that money is being discussed. It's that in many discussions money seems to be the main motivator for evaluating artwork. People celebrate new auctions highs here like they've won something. Any discussion almost always goes to the prices and value rather than all the other aspects of the art. If all you care about is the value and the profit, collect coins. That market has been whored out for years. This quote sums up the feeling I get when reading the discussions here. Don't want to single out one person, it's a recurring theme but this is a perfectly succinct example of the attitude I'm referring to:

 

It was ultimately mercenary in its creation and it is bought and sold the same way it was created, and for my I don't see the problem with that.

 

I wasn't attracted to the hobby because I wanted to be "mercenary" in my pursuit of artwork. I've stopped collecting certain types of art to avoid that mercenary attitude because it sucks all the fun out of the hobby. I like to think the hobby is more than making a profit and screwing people over for profit. I know that's a way of life to some very high profile supposed "Good Guy" collectors I've known for years but I always felt that was a small group of people in the hobby, not the hobby as a whole.

 

Finally, I know it's near impossible to convey nuance on the internet but I'll try. Despite how some interpreted my comment I don't think ALL discussion of money in the hobby is crass or verboten. Maybe I could have been clearer. I think the way it's discussed here much of the time is crass and diminishes the other reasons to want to own the artwork and the talents of the artists involved. I also think many of the points made in these forums when discussing value are ill informed, only a part of the full picture and many times only serve ulterior motives of the poster. On the surface you can think it helps newbies or the hobby but in my estimation it can do more harm than good.

 

This is my opinion. I know others that share it but aren't vocal about it and don't want to get dragged into these types of discussions. I expressed my opinion here even though I know it's unpopular because I think it's helpful to know there are other ways to look at the hobby. No one has to agree with me. No one has to be offended by my opinion and get defensive either. Just do what you can to make the hobby enjoyable for yourself. In the long run, I don't think focusing on values will accomplish that.

[Bronty]

It's obvious the more vocal members of this group do not agree. This will be my last post on this thread to try to explain my point:

 

Well from reading that it almost sounds like you guys put OA on a pedestal and treat it as some sort of virginal deity whose purity is assaulted by discussions of her value.

 

Anyone that tries to grab the “higher ground” by suggesting that money is Satan and his name should not be mentioned ,from whatever country they are from, is not seeing the whole picture and being a bit condescending.

 

As I tried to explain in my other posts the issue isn't SOLELY that money is being discussed. It's that in many discussions money seems to be the main motivator for evaluating artwork. People celebrate new auctions highs here like they've won something. Any discussion almost always goes to the prices and value rather than all the other aspects of the art. If all you care about is the value and the profit, collect coins. That market has been whored out for years. This quote sums up the feeling I get when reading the discussions here. Don't want to single out one person, it's a recurring theme but this is a perfectly succinct example of the attitude I'm referring to:

 

It was ultimately mercenary in its creation and it is bought and sold the same way it was created, and for my I don't see the problem with that.

 

I wasn't attracted to the hobby because I wanted to be "mercenary" in my pursuit of artwork. I've stopped collecting certain types of art to avoid that mercenary attitude because it sucks all the fun out of the hobby.

 

 

maybe that was a poor choice of words on my part, I wasn't suggesting taking advantage of people is OK, not at all. All I meant by mercenary was that money talks in this hobby and others, and there's not much one can do to change that.

[rrichards]

As usual your comments are thoughtful and well articulated. You comments serve as a needed reminder as to why all of us started collecting in the first place. Again ,it’s all good!

[Tony S]

I'd like to add a thought that I haven't seen yet on the discussion of the money and investment factor of collecting original art.

 

I enjoy many characters, admire so many artists work. Since I'm not rich - it makes no sense for me to not at least try to collect Original Comic art that others would enjoy owning years from now if I decide to sell - or that my heirs will want to sell when my time here on this world is done. Conan to X-Men, Adams to Zeck, pencil & ink or oil on streched canvas, vintage or recent. I could find within that description multiple peices of art I'd love to hang on the wall for a decade or two. So why not buy something that also has at least a decent shot of being worth more than I paid at the end of that decade or two?

 

Just my two cents.

[bocaratondefense]

Quite a few pages added to the preview for the November auction.

 

Consigners are breaking out their Frank Miller OA: 2 DKR pages, 2 DD pages, 2 Wolverine pages and one Ronin page. Although the second DK page is not very exciting aside from the inclusion of Joker, it will be interesting to see how the hobby responds to yet two more DK pages. http://comics.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=7039&lotIdNo=97001

 

Also a very nice Jim Steranko cover. http://comics.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=7039&lotIdNo=1022