Analysis and theory on ComicLink's August OA auction on OCAL...

[artcollector9]

Thanks Terry!!

 

Rob

[Bronty]

I don't know if anyone can confirm, but I heard that the #122 splash traded hands for $17K at one point. $16K seems to be the level, which is still a big loss no matter what Byrne's input was. .

 

Interesting posts everybody.

 

Comparing OA to true commodities is dicey though. Nobody grew up with one particular brick of gold or ingot of silver. Purchase decisions are often emotional. People overpay to get what they want at times and if upon resale there isn't another person willing to overpay you get a large drop.

 

The opposite can happen. A well bought piece can auction a year later for double because somebody had to have it.

 

I think we have to accept that as a whole there is going to be a good amount of volatility to OA as a result and a few good or a few bad auctions don't necessarily mean anything.

 

Comparing OA to fine art is equally dicey. OA buyers may love the art but if that particular artist hadn't been published in that particular medium, they wouldn't even know the name, so fundamentally most OA collecting is always going to be about the medium rather than purely the artwork.

 

I don't say this to discourage the comparisons, they are fun and worthwhile but I look at my own behaviour. When I am considering a purchase how do I determine what am I willing to pay?

 

I'm not spending a great deal of time on economic theory or asset return comparisons and I'd bet a lot of money that most other guys aren't either. I buy things I like at prices I feel are fair (at most) or at prices I think are cheap. I rely on my experience (not so much as a OA collector as I bought my first piece in 2007 only) but as a collector, period.

 

At the end of the day collectibles prices aren't based on normal notions of utility (if I buy copper I can make wire and sell it for a profit). They are pretty well just based other than how cool the item is, how scarce it is, and what that mix of coolness and scarcity is going for (similar items).

 

If OA is viewed as more cool by more collectors going forward, there certainly will be a price adjustment upwards. Because collectibles prices are ultimately arbitrary and emotional and simply tied to what somebody is willing to pay.

 

So looking at what prices will do IMO just boils down to OA's profile and whether or not it results in new money. Perhaps an increased profile has led to new guys willing to play? On the other hand a decreased profile or just stagnation may lead to a decline.

 

So if we are asking ourselves whether growth should be 'steady or steroidal', both Gene's and Glen's angles of analysis have their own points of merit. Its just so hard to concretely pin down the inputs into either however that ultimately I think one just has to rely on their gut, more or less.

 

And my gut tells me that there is more of a push on OA lately, more collectors, more discussion, likely more people willing to ultimately cut a check for something good. Higher profile. If ditko and kirby outpace byrne and buscema and BWS and the like, well, frankly I think that's warranted given the former two artists' place in history. Until now there really hasn't been too much separation.

 

 

[jbud73]

I don't know if anyone can confirm, but I heard that the #122 splash traded hands for $17K at one point. $16K seems to be the level, which is still a big loss no matter what Byrne's input was. And that BWS Conan #2 page that traded hands at $10K earlier this year would also be a big loss no matter which era of BWS Conan you prefer. In any case, I think it's fair to say that not all OA is performing like '60s Marvel large art by the most important artists.

 

As you said elsewhere, educated men can disagree. Personally, I see better uses for my money in a lot of cases than buying more OA. I'm still looking to make a couple more acquisitions before the end of the year, but not in the '60s Marvel large art or mid-'80s-early '90s sectors which seem to be positively bubblicious of late. If I want to buy hard assets here (not saying I do, but just for argument's sake), why wouldn't I buy silver at 35% off of last year's peak prices or gold 15% below last year's peak prices or fine wine at 25% off of last year's peak prices instead of buying OA marked 25-50+% higher than end of 2011 prices? This is what many hard asset guys don't understand: price matters. Gold at $1,700 may or may not be a good inflation hedge. If gold were to quadruple in price in short order like that ASM #29 page, I'm not sure that $6,800 gold would really end up protecting you very well - you'd be better off buying less appreciated inflation hedges. Just some food for thought.

 

Gene I think you underestimate the power of original art and its superiority over the CGC graded comic book today.

 

You spend 10K on a 9.2 Cap 27 CGC highest census. Can you open the book. and read it....NO, Can you enjoy it.....only when you spend 1/2 hour going to bank to look at the book in a dimly lighted bank. You cannot even touch the book and feel the paper. In the early days of collecting, OA was very scarce compared to the comic books, OA collectors were rare because the stuff was just not available to buy at anyprice, you could READ what you bought back then and feel like you owned the comic book, it had a certain feel to it. That all changed when marvel let a large selection or OA go back to the creators as well as EC art coming on the market, barks paintings etc and add the fact that you had to now put a comic book in a nuke shelter.

 

The collector today is not the same as he was back then, they want something to show other folks and enjoy on there wall everyday.

 

OA is coming...it took a long time...but its coming.....

 

Flat out on one a kind unique OA blows comic books away. That is why prices are going UP faster than the comic books themselves except for the very top items. I still shake my head though...600K for a 1980's cover....... Both comic books and art I feel are great investments if you buy carefully and will go up in value over time. But the greater upside for OA is there in my mind.

 

Here is a test, Gene, the OA to AF 15 the whole comic book was donated...that OA would bring much more than the comic book itself......

 

Now there are always exceptions to the rule. For example I would buy a Cap 1 today over any OA that is market priced. But if you look at the classic splash page coming up on Ha com by dikto...I would take that over a similarly priced AF 15 at say 100K.

 

One DISADVANTAGE of OA is that there is no CGC to tell you it is real or original. I hope and pray as the market expands that the CGC will consider grading and certifying OA with some sort of stamp on the back as well as a certificate.

 

 

I'll chime in on the transition or co-existence of the comic collector to the OA realm, having made that latter leap around 2007. A few factors to consider.

 

1. There are increased barriers to entry into the OA collecting field. Collectors have it in their nature to be impulsive and nostalgic, they are not always ruled by this but I think we would all agree that these traits exist in the comic based collectibles fraternity. It is very easy to buy an awesome comic for say $250 that fuels and fulfills those needs, this is not so with OA and the price of new art, or good new art is a substantial barrier to entry and entrenchment.

 

A related point to this an a counterbalance to the, "there can be only one" OA pull, is the, "look at all the shiny new toys pull". Every day their are great comics posted for sale over and over it is easier and less expensive to get your comic fix, so new comic collectors have made the leap, but not all of them have made a 100% all encompassing leap.

 

2. Competition for resources. Picking up on point number one there are three generic categories of comic book collector making the transition to OA. A) I call these the Cash out Cowboys. They sell it all and come in looking to buy shiny new pennies. These collectors will have the new money infusion ability to add cash to the OA marketplace. B) The hmm I need something new to collect types. Generally they will buy a few pieces here and there and OA is a one off, they may or may not make a full transition; just as likely to sell all their X-Men to buy ASMs as they are to use that money to buy OA. C) The multicultural. This collector comes in and buys what they like, so instead of finishing X-Men and moving to ASM they will focus some resources on art. However they still buy comics so their infusion will be more sustained than person B) but they are not quite infusing as much of their disposable as collector A).

 

3) The comic collector considerations. I would consider them new OA money, even the cash out cowboys, while not new money in the comics collectible market, are new OA money. So what is their overall impact? Hard to say really, I guess it depends on how many B and C types sustain and increase their transition. That said I think they are having an impact on the prices, but at the top end? Probably only the Cowboys are having an impact there. Is Doug Schmell now a serious OA buyer for the long term??

 

4) The shock factor. A lot of comic collectors I have talked to that have made OA purchases over the past few years have admitted to being apprehensive in their OA buys. Overall they love the art they buy but have a tendency to distrust the pricing. Remember they will have no trade, are used to a market that has more resources and at least some regulation (through CGC). Many of them remain in the con-sketch phase than you would imagine. There is nothing wrong with that in fact in a lot of ways it is an easy entry point for new OA collectors, maybe the only easy entry point. The cash trade or prevalence of trade is also a factor as this does not occur with anywhere near the frequency in comics. The lack of dealers is also a consideration I have heard more than a few comic collectors throw up their hands over how few dealers there are and the "please inquire pricing" tactic.

 

Anyway those are my impressions of the comic book to OA impact that is occurring with greater frequency. Oh and a final consideration. Not all of the comic collectors remain after their initial foray. Some of them have owned their collections for decades and you buy what you know, or push to complete things you have been working decades to finish.

 

[Gatsby77]

I'm probably one of the newest OA collectors here. I have exactly 8 pieces, and have bought six of them in the last month.

 

Having spent some leisure time this holiday weekend perusing the marketdata on CAF I was surprised to find how it's not nearly as useful for pricing as GPA--both due to the dearth of reported transactions and the vagaries of inexact compables (the cover to X comic # 19 may be not at all comparable to # 18 or 20).

 

But the point is--I _really_ hate the "please inquire" pricing.

 

The way I see it, the art should either be truly for sale, or not. To force me to proactively inquire makes me feel like it's a used car dealership, where the dealer will try to feel me out and give me a totally different price because I'm a newbie or simply sound like a sucker.

[Pete Marino]

I'm probably one of the newest OA collectors here. I have exactly 8 pieces, and have bought six of them in the last month.

 

Having spent some leisure time this holiday weekend perusing the marketdata on CAF I was surprised to find how it's not nearly as useful for pricing as GPA--both due to the dearth of reported transactions and the vagaries of inexact compables (the cover to X comic # 19 may be not at all comparable to # 18 or 20).

 

But the point is--I _really_ hate the "please inquire" pricing.

 

The way I see it, the art should either be truly for sale, or not. To force me to proactively inquire makes me feel like it's a used car dealership, where the dealer will try to feel me out and give me a totally different price because I'm a newbie or simply sound like a sucker.

 

Snarky Answer 1st:

 

Please Inquire for my feelings on this post.

 

Real Answer:

 

No one forces you to deal with "them" most people post prices, if someone has a policy you don't like you don't have to deal with them. If they have something you "need" then I guess you have 2 options. Suck up your pride and deal with them or pass on it. Complaining about it won't change "them" I can pretty much guarantee, because they are not going change.

 

[Bronty]

 

The way I see it, the art should either be truly for sale, or not. To force me to proactively inquire makes me feel like it's a used car dealership, where the dealer will try to feel me out and give me a totally different price because I'm a newbie or simply sound like a sucker.

 

Well yeah, that is *exactly* what they are doing, feeling you out. But they have a monopoly on the piece and its their property so they can sell it as they see fit. You can always just move on to the next piece; there's never any shortage of things truly for sale at heritage and so on anyways

 

It isn't so bad. The buyer doesn't have to a passive participant in the process.... YOU also have the opportunity to feel the seller out and see if they "need" to sell or are looking for a home run. The seller isn't the only person with input in the price and there's nothing stopping you from adjusting your offer based on the seller's needs and motivations either. As long as there's no dishonesty and no one outright being taken advantage of, there's nothing wrong with EITHER party trying to get the best deal they can.

 

Sellers will use their leverage (they have the art and no one else does) and buyers will use their leverage ($$$$) as best as they can. The buyer's ability to leverage will depend on the price and liquidity of the piece in question, and the seller's situation (bills mounting? or independently wealthy?), to the extent the buyer is aware of it.

 

So............ yes the seller of an unpriced piece is trying to feel you out. But that's where its up to you to feel them out too.

[NelsonAI]

Gene

 

Most of the bloggers tend to spam the CGC Boards as a method of self promotion but don't really seem to add any actual insight. I would agree with Ferran that your write ups would have a positive impact on the hobby and put other bloggers to shame. (I also enjoy Ferran's posts and relentless research).

 

However, I've always enjoyed your posts and hope you will continue to do so here directly on CGC. Just start your own thread.

 

Cheers!

N.

 

 

 

 

 

[suspense39]

When I think about Fishler (sp?) spending 600k+ for the Mcspidey cover

 

Don't think about it too much - consensus opinion is that the full story there hasn't come out yet.

 

 

Additionally, I think OA art, even at these levels is much safer than buying modern art (other than strip art, has any comic OA art that was considered highly desireable fallen out of favor in the last 20 years)? I recently read the book The $12 million stuffed shark, which opened my eyes to the world of modern art. Would it really surprise anyone if people woke up tommorow and collectively realized that art assembled by Jeff Koons assistants is (I hope I am not offending anyone)?

 

OA is definitely more liquid and transaction costs are potentially a lot lower as there is a fair bit of collector-to-collector and collector-to-dealer selling/trading. It is said that ~80% of fine art never resells for higher than when it first left the dealer - all we hear about in the media are the 8 and 9-figure sales, but the fact of the matter is that most art is a terrible investment.

 

That said, I'm not sure that OA to fine art is the right comparison anyway. I had dinner this evening with a friend and fellow collector that everyone here knows, and he asked whether if there was any pop culture collectible hobby that's more pricey overall than comic OA (yeah, there are individual comics and cards and memorabilia that cost more, but OA would give anything a run for its money these days on an overall basis I suspect). I told him what I had just paid for the complete sets of 1965 and 1966 James Bond trading cards at auction last week. His response? "You can't even buy a decent Modern panel page for that much". He's right!

 

If you insist on making the fine art comparison, I'll just say that most people who don't really know the art world/market are oblivious to the fact that OA prices have in many cases surpassed fine art prices. Oh sure, OA prices are nowhere near what "The Scream" fetched at Sotheby's that summer, but walk in with the $100K that went to that ASM #29 page that just sold and you'll be able to buy probably 98% of what's on offer at the several hundred art galleries in Chelsea in NYC. I was the underbidder on a cool Ed Ruscha (one of the top 20 most important contemporary artists) piece the other week that fetched less than that FF #19, ASM #30 and Avengers #3 pages did at CLink. A hundred grand would have bought you a Jean Helion painting worthy of the Centre Pompidou when it was on offer at a Chelsea gallery earlier this summer and still left you with enough to buy a great Kirby page. $100K may not get you to first base at a Sotheby's contemporary evening sale, but it would have been enough to buy all but a handful of lots at the Christie's First Open Contemporary Art sale in March of this year, including a full-blown painted Warhol.

 

Let's not kid ourselves - OA prices are high now. Can they go higher? Sure. But let's not delude ourselves into thinking that prices are cheap just because a handful of baseball cards and comics have sold for more, or because a minuscule percentage of fine art sells for truly unfathomable prices. If you're going to make those selective comparisons, you have to make all the other comparisons too which paint a very different picture.

 

 

Il liked reading this, most of my OA collector friends are in the contemorary art world in one way or another.....very different places. I see and hear about comparisons between comic art and "art world art" quite bit. Very few artists from the comic world have crossed over to the fine art world (Crumb, Ware, Wolverton to name a few) and the ones who have, dont command prices that are that close to what other artists in thier new circle are getting, they are outsiders in that context. That being said the comic related world is so much broader with much more public interest with a much more broad collecting base and price range, that any one can get something respectable for as low as $25,00, and that is pretty much unheard of in the contemporary and fine art world. I think unfortuanately Comic art still carries a "collectibles" label rather than an "art" label, and I think that contributes to it not being taken entirely seriously as fine art, though i think it is changing...any way looking forward to reading more of your posts

Chris

[delekkerste]

Thanks for the kind words and interesting observations.

 

Just thought that some might find perusing this to be an interesting exercise:

 

Sotheby's September 2012 Contemporary Art Sale E-Catalogue

 

Now, granted, the major, marquee contemporary art sales occur in May and November in New York, while March and September feature smaller sales of generally less expensive art. But, as you can see, the overwhelming majority of offerings carry 4 and 5-figure estimates from a "who's who" list of contemporary artists. I am in no way advocating contemporary art to be a superior investment vehicle than OA (as I said before, most fine art is a terrible investment, with high transaction costs and limited or non-existent liquidity for most pieces). But, if you're buying art to enjoy, contemplate, discuss, complement your home, etc., I think a lot of OA collectors would be surprised at what most fine art, even by some of the biggest world-renowned names, really sells for - it's not all just 9-figure Picasso, Munchs and Giacomettis.

[spider9698]

Gene

You've hit the nail on the head. Once OA prices starting hitting high 5 figures and A plus pieces being 6 figures, my wife thought we ought to start looking at Christies and Sothebys auctions for similar examples. Incredible what you can purchase for the same dollars. I have started focusing on the Old Masters (Tiepolo, etc) not necessarily Kirby, Frazetta and Ditko!!

 

[Bronty]

some of those are lovely and the prices not too bad I guess. I've certainly seen some pieces I liked even in local galleries at the 15k type level. That said I really don't think its apples to apples. I know I don't need to tell you this, but look at ditko charlton panel page values vs what ditko ASM cover values. You can't even compare.

 

And if I look at your list, let's take Alexander Calder as an example, since I happen to be familiar with him simply because I am friends with his grandson. Sotheby's lists some drawings.... the calder equivalent of a charlton panel page, for five figure sums as you say. Meanwhile his mobile statue record (the ASM cover equivalent) is $18.5m.

 

--------

PS....... explain this to me? http://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2012/contemporary-art-n08875/lot.221.lotnum.html

 

that's one of the stereotypical type pieces that I find hard to understand or appreciate.

 

 

[suspense39]

Thanks for the kind words and interesting observations.

 

Just thought that some might find perusing this to be an interesting exercise:

 

Sotheby's September 2012 Contemporary Art Sale E-Catalogue

 

Now, granted, the major, marquee contemporary art sales occur in May and November in New York, while March and September feature smaller sales of generally less expensive art. But, as you can see, the overwhelming majority of offerings carry 4 and 5-figure estimates from a "who's who" list of contemporary artists. I am in no way advocating contemporary art to be a superior investment vehicle than OA (as I said before, most fine art is a terrible investment, with high transaction costs and limited or non-existent liquidity for most pieces). But, if you're buying art to enjoy, contemplate, discuss, complement your home, etc., I think a lot of OA collectors would be surprised at what most fine art, even by some of the biggest world-renowned names, really sells for - it's not all just 9-figure Picasso, Munchs and Giacomettis.

 

one of the things i like about that is that they post estimates, its a very helpfull guide. oviously if its something that someone must have, the estimate is irrelevant. Although i seem to be in the low 4 figure range of collecting OCA, I appreciate that someone can still pick up art for 25.00-100.00 at comic art auctions....its kind of shocking really!

[delekkerste]

Incredible what you can purchase for the same dollars. I have started focusing on the Old Masters (Tiepolo, etc) not necessarily Kirby, Frazetta and Ditko!!

 

Stephen, you are definitely correct. Impressionist/Modern and Contemporary Art surpassed Old Masters in terms of attracting collector money long ago, and it's truly astounding some of the under-the-radar bargains to be had at an Old Masters sale nowadays. You can get a gorgeous, fully finished Jan van Huysum watercolor for about the same price as a ho-hum Ditko ASM page these days (I'm talking the sub-$50K, not the $100K bath salt smoking, variety). Oftentimes, I'd rather take the comic art, but in this case, I'd take the van Huysum all day long.

 

 

And if I look at your list, let's take Alexander Calder as an example, since I happen to be familiar with him simply because I am friends with his grandson. Sotheby's lists some drawings.... the calder equivalent of a charlton panel page, for five figure sums as you say. Meanwhile his mobile statue record (the ASM cover equivalent) is $18.5m.

 

I'm not sure that's the right analogy...maybe they're the equivalent of a Frazetta Johnny Comet strip or White Indian page vs. a full-blown Frazetta oil. What they are not, though, is the equivalent of one of those Frazetta scribbles that are interesting, but not the finished article or very presentable. You can buy a very nice, presentable Calder work on paper from the '60s or '70s that I'm sure would look great in your living room starting for about the same price as what early Kirby FF pages now seem to be fetching ("b-b-b-b-b-but Thing transformation pages are SO significant!!")

 

That said, your point is taken. For artists whose top work sells in the millions, you're typically not going to get one of their most significant works for 5 figures or low 6 figures (oftentimes you can still buy something very nice by an important artist in that price range, though). But, that's not necessarily true about emerging contemporary artists, where that kind of bankroll can go a very long way. And, if you start talking about DKR splash or McSpidey money, then you really can start buying some of the better work out there. A fresh-to-market, important Ed Ruscha early (1964) word painting sold for $554K at Christie's in March. I'd take that every day and twice on Sunday before any McSpidey cover. Heck, there are only a handful of comic art pieces period that I'd take before that Ruscha.

[Baron]

Although i seem to be in the low 4 figure range of collecting OCA, I appreciate that someone can still pick up art for 25.00-100.00 at comic art auctions....its kind of shocking really!

 

I don't want to get too far off topic here, but speaking of shocking- while I know that many here dislike Rob Liefeld's art, I recently noticed that a number of his published DC covers have been going for what I would think are real low prices- about $250-$400 a pop on eBay. He seems to have a huge fan base too (evidenced by the lines he attracts at cons), I'm guessing they're more comic collectors rather than OA

 

There was a recent Youngblood cover he sold on eBay that went for only $200, man I wish I got in on that just to have a Liefeld cover, controversies aside.

[Bronty]

I understand what you are getting at, but it's a difficult comparison isn't it? Wouldn't a better comparison for emerging contemporary art be Moore walking dead pages than ditko ASM? Ditko ASM is pretty well the top of our hobby and more relatable to the 8 and 9 figure names in relative stature.

 

I'm not even going to address mcspidey because that result was pretty out there.

 

I'm trying to understand your point on comic oa approaching fine art levels because so far I don't see it unless one compares the very top comic oa with lesser fine art pieces and or fine art by artists yet to establish themselves.

 

I go back to what I said about seeing fine art locally that I would enjoy in the low five figures... So I get what you are trying to say, but those 15k fine art pieces that I can appreciate are never going to be the art worlds equivalent of ditko ASM,Frazetta, or even mcspidey

 

Oh and yes, your fraz johnny comet vs oil example is a better analogy.

[Bronty]

I think we are both saying the same thing or close to it at the end of the day. I guess I just dont find it surprising that a grail in the one hobby could be within arms reach of a lesser piece in a larger hobby

[delekkerste]

I'm trying to understand your point on comic oa approaching fine art levels because so far I don't see it unless one compares the very top comic oa with lesser fine art pieces and or fine art by artists yet to establish themselves.

 

Well, I think relative comparisons are all you can make, unless you believe that the top examples of OA should sell for comparable levels to the top examples of fine art. In any case, the point I was trying to make is that a lot of OA collectors seem to have a warped view of how OA is valued vs. fine art. While it's true that the prices on the top <1% of fine art make everything else on the planet, including OA, look cheap, that just tells me this is a bogus comparison and that it's much more relevant to compare OA to the other 99% of art which sells at prices which are, if not cheap, at least aren't totally beyond the realm of human comprehension.

 

That comparison shows that OA prices have, at least at the high end, become comparably priced with a huge swath of the fine art world. I'll leave it up to the individual to determine whether a first-tier piece of art by a comic book artist should be valued the same as a secondary work by an Old Master or other world renowned artist. But, I think it's definitely worthwhile to at least be thinking in those terms and to have this conversation.

 

Not to mention, OA is just becoming expensive relative to everything. Do you know of anything else where prices have been marked up as much YTD or over the past couple of years (besides AAPL stock :doh: )? The price of OA relative to everything has gotten more expensive; it takes more units of whatever else you could possibly buy to purchase the equivalent amount of OA, whether it be cash, real estate, art, gold, silver, cars, household items, food, bonds, stocks, collectibles, etc. That's just a statement of mathematical fact.

 

Again, that's not to say that prices can't go higher, as it's largely a confidence game where market psychology rules. But, I, for one, am noticing more and more that it's not only fine art that's looking cheaper by comparison, but also other collectibles (I mentioned the James Bond trading card sets I bought last week...the slabbed baseball cards I bought were less expensive still). It's kind of strange to me to see all these pages being valued the same amount these days as shiny new BMWs and Porsches - I don't know about you guys, but more and more often I find myself thinking these days that there must be better places to spend my money.

[Bronty]

I'm trying to understand your point on comic oa approaching fine art levels because so far I don't see it unless one compares the very top comic oa with lesser fine art pieces and or fine art by artists yet to establish themselves.

 

Well, I think relative comparisons are all you can make, unless you believe that the top examples of OA should sell for comparable levels to the top examples of fine art. In any case, the point I was trying to make is that a lot of OA collectors seem to have a warped view of how OA is valued vs. fine art. While it's true that the prices on the top <1% of fine art make everything else on the planet, including OA, look cheap, that just tells me this is a bogus comparison and that it's much more relevant to compare OA to the other 99% of art which sells at prices which are, if not cheap, at least aren't totally beyond the realm of human comprehension.

 

trouble with that is if you are going to look at the "other 99%" of fine art, you have to look at the "other 99%" of comic art. I just bought a cerebus page for $650. Reasonable price, I'm happy with it, and to me its a price relative to fine art that is perfectly fair.

 

I suspect the reason you have the view that comic OA is getting expensive is because you like to collect the good stuff, the 1%, and sure, that's risen a lot. But comparing the "top 1%" of anything to the "other 99%" of anything else is never going to result in a fair comparison. Compare the $30k Calder drawing to the $650 cerebus page. Doesn't seem unreasonable to me.... fair comparison and fair relative values.

[Bronty]

It's kind of strange to me to see all these pages being valued the same amount these days as shiny new BMWs and Porsches - I don't know about you guys, but more and more often I find myself thinking these days that there must be better places to spend my money.

 

I do hear you there. Heck I vote with my wallet there by avoiding those pieces and prices even though I'd like to own them.

[delekkerste]

trouble with that is if you are going to look at the "other 99%" of fine art, you have to look at the "other 99%" of comic art.

 

Not to keep beating this dead horse, but, implicit in what I am saying is that the top X% of fine art should be valued higher than the top X% of comic art. As such, it would be unfair to compare the same percentile of fine art with the same percentile of comic art. I mean, no one (well, almost no one) would think comparing a Rembrandt or Picasso masterpiece to a Kirby or Ditko key original cover would be a fair comparison in terms of valuation, much as comparing a Calder work on paper to a Dave Sim Cerebus page wouldn't make much sense either. Comparing a Calder work on paper to a B-level Ditko ASM page though? I can see people coming down on either side of that argument and I would say that would be a conversation worth having.