Flippers- are they bad for the hobby?

[Jimmy Linguini]

I will benefit from this type of thing, but I'm just not sure if it's a good thing for the hobby as a whole. That's what input I'm looking for.

 

Define what you mean by "not sure if it's a good thing for the hobby"?

 

What do you consider bad for the hobby?

 

I'm actually really interested in what Roy has to say about the entire Flippers are bad for the hobby argument. So Roy - how do you feel about the entire concept?

 

[Terry Doyle]

I like flippers...

 

 

[Cbone3-migration]

@ VintageComics: I'm not really sure that I have the experience and perspective to define what is good or bad for the hobby since I am so new to it. If I were cornered and had to define "good for the hobby", I would say good is something that promotes long-term participation in and viability of OA collecting. I know that's a vanilla answer, but that's what I have.

[VintageComics]

@ VintageComics: I'm not really sure that I have the experience and perspective to define what is good or bad for the hobby since I am so new to it. If I were cornered and had to define "good for the hobby", I would say good is something that promotes long-term participation in and viability of OA collecting. I know that's a vanilla answer, but that's what I have.

 

Flipping has always been a part of any market. whether it's comics, art or food and construction supplies.

 

I don't think it's a "problem" unless the percentage of flippers becomes a large minority and then there are no end users.

 

Ultimately, most markets regulate themselves. Price meets demand and they stabilize at some point.

 

If you mean "good" by art prices continuing to rise, well that's all going to depend on demand. Prices have gone through the roof and in this volatile market I personally am pulling out of it.

[Cbone3-migration]

I'm not certain that rising prices are good, but I'm not sure they are bad, either. Like you said, I think that the market should regulate itself. As long as price increases are the result of increased demand, I think it's great. Whether that is what's happening now is up for debate. I know I sound like a broken record, but I just don't have the experience to be sure either way.

 

Thanks for your input. I appreciate it.

[suspense39]

I actually like and think its smart what the top art galleries do in terms of regulating prices in the art market. It would be difficult to do with comic art though, but it would provide a little stability and lees volatility.

In a sense all the dealers that have a certain artist agree on pricing and slowly bring it up together over time and development or growing recognition of an artist. Auction sales in this way do not bring out reactionary price changes because low auction sales are considered as well as high. Auction sales of popular artists tend to be higher than gallery prices due to the fact that galleries often have wait lists for those artists, and often have first right of refusal written into the sales contract so that collectors don't just buy from the gallery and immediately flip it at auction. By keeping it somewhat steady every one benefits IMHO.

 

[bedrockcomics]

Anything I buy today I will sell tomorrow - If the price is right .Call me a flipper .

[comicwiz]

Here is an observation. It is based on generality and take from it what you will as far as suggestions of "flippers" taking the hobby on a path of betterment or to the gates of Mordor.

 

As a result of having secondary hobby interests, one of the things I have noticed is that each hobby has erected it's own barriers to make it difficult for flippers/speculators to prosper.

 

The first is of a reputational nature, and pretty easy for most to understand that without any history or track record, it can be increasingly difficult to establish trust and loyalty.

 

That said, where I have noticed a significant degree of hostility is in markets where certification has acted to usurp a lot of the "trust" that old hobby stalwarts were able to develop through numerous years of experience buying/selling/trading.

 

It is unfortunate that most of the resistance shown by more well-known hobby dealers/names towards certification is misdirected, and seems to be more a protest toward certification as an enabler to the everyman flipper, which at the core is a protest toward the kind of benefits they used to enjoy when people were buying from them exclusively.

 

More specifically, it is the prospect of diminishing returns unless their items are certified and submitting to a form of transparency and level of compete with everyone and anyone who has the common sense and wherewithal to submit their items for grading and selling them on eBay.

 

In the long-run, democratizing the process where anyone can turn a ratty piece of junk into a pile of money is a good thing. I find that with every hobby where the stalwarts were able to entrench their influence and reach, there was and remains an abuse of that influence that is allowed to insulate itself with a circle of friends and loyalists that continue to promote them, with or without merit.

 

Seeing a rookie trying to flip an item at an obscene price is more likely to arouse more entertainment value than anything harmful. On the flipside, seeing a long established dealer/name doing this is far more concerning.

 

Either way, there will always be extreme cases where people are turning to a hobby for all the wrong reasons, but I think that the good far outweighs the bad when we are given the opportunity to talk out in the open about something that irks us. In some hobby's, even making a remark that could cast a well-known name or hobbyist in a negative light could mean a cold shoulder effect (which inextricably ties back to my first point of reputation as a currency) that would be comparable to what happened when a DC completist was told many moons ago on these boards that the "wheels were in motion."

[jjonahjameson1]

I'm not certain that rising prices are good, but I'm not sure they are bad, either. Like you said, I think that the market should regulate itself. As long as price increases are the result of increased demand, I think it's great. Whether that is what's happening now is up for debate. I know I sound like a broken record, but I just don't have the experience to be sure either way.

 

Thanks for your input. I appreciate it.

 

Who are you?

Do you have a CAF gallery?

[1webslinger]

Just ask some fans of Adam Hughes

[aokartman]

my lame comicart fans site

What I find interesting is the term "flipping", as if this is some piece of cake way of making huge money with no effort. Wouldn't everyone be doing it if it was so lucrative? I bought comic art I liked when I had disposable income, and turned some around to fund more purchases, but now I'm pushing sixty years old. So I watch trends a little more closely because I'm mostly selling what I have left rather than acquiring. If you are always buying, the "flipping" phenomenom can be annoying. When you start trying to figure out what to do with all your stuff, you try to get what you can for it and I tend to not worry about whether the next guy "flips" what I just sold him. I've done my homework, and if he makes some quick dough through his contacts and expertise, more power to him!

I'm actually considering networking with established dealers with solid websites when I unleash my last great pieces, because they have shown they know how to "flip" for the best money.

Short answer, flipping is good for the hobby, it shows there is an active enough market to inspire aggressive marketers who invest in the hobby. Win-win. My 2 cents. Best, David S. Albright

 

[VintageComics]

Flipping is actually a poor term with a negative connotation.

 

They are merely middle men providing a product by taking it from one market to another. It's the way the entire world operates. Middle men, sales people, etc provide valuable services by providing products that people want or need.

 

That's why I asked earlier what the OP meant by "bad for the hobby".

 

If we're talking about instability, volatility and sharp price changes then it may not be "good" but ultimately, every market stabilizes itself. It's not something you can label as "good" or "bad", just "good" or "bad" for the buyer or the seller.

 

 

[Dan.Adrians]

Well said, VintageComics. If The opportunity is afforded to one that can purchase art at a price they believe they can turn around and sell for a profit, good for the seller. Like VintageComics said, middle men, salespeople, welcome to capitalism. Besides, it is the consumers prerogative to buy, or not to buy.

[Niblos!]

Trading or as you refer to it as "flipping" is the only way a married man can make transactions ; ) Life is too short, grab that Frazetta!

 

Now if you mean scoring a completely "FREE" head sketch of Ghost Rider by legendary artist, Mike Ploog at Heroes (2005) and throwing it up on eBay the very next day to make a profit, such as thecomicmonster (fog city art), then I think most collectors would tend to frown upon such behavior. I sent him an email to express my disgust and he banded me from future purchases - explained it was the way he MADE his money!!! Very bad business, if you ask me.

 

And then there's a whole other topic: Artists that truly believe anything purchased directly through them should remain in THAT collection forevermore.

 

Come to think of it, if it weren't for "flippers", the little guys (bottom feeders) wouldn't ever have a chance to score some of the nicer pieces. Besides, you hold on to something for 17 or 18 years, you tend to want some change!

 

 

[Khazano]

Trading or as you refer to it as "flipping" is the only way a married man can make transactions ; ) Life is too short, grab that Frazetta!

 

Now if you mean scoring a FREE head sketch of Ghost Rider by legendary artist, Mike Ploog at Heroes and throwing it up on eBay the very next day to make a profit, such as the*****monster, then I think most collectors would tend to frown upon such behavior. Very bad business, if you ask me.

And then there's a whole other topic: Artists that truly believe anything purchased directly through them should remain in THAT collection forevermore.

 

 

I started collecting in 2000 at the age of 17 and built my collection on the art of flipping for the first 6 years id say. I see nothing wrong with it.

 

Now, the part I bolded is a completely different matter. And I agree with you entirely. Anything that was gifted to me, OR I bought cheaper than I shouldve cause I was clearly a vocal fan, I've never sold.

[Royd]

This is more the concern I have that those who pass themselves off as "genuine fans" to score a sketch or piece of artwork and who then immediately "flip" the piece will cause creators to no longer sketch at shows

 

Adam Hughes is one, Frank Cho is another (although he has sketched at a few shows recently), Stuart Immonen is yet another and there are more. I'm not including fans who picked up a piece and then due to hardship have to part with the artwork to fund hospital bills, car repairs or other expense. I'm referring to those who pass themselves off as genuine fans solely to obtain a piece for immediate resale and profit. Just my 2 cents

 

 

Just ask some fans of Adam Hughes

[Khazano]

 

Adam Hughes is one, Frank Cho is another (although he has sketched at a few shows recently), Stuart Immonen is yet another and there are more.

 

So thats why he wouldnt do a sketch in my book. I BEGGED, with cash in hand, to no avail!

[Royd]

Hey Michael,

 

If you ever saw or get a chance to check out Stuart's "50 Reasons to Stop Sketching at Conventions" (a small publication he released in 2006 but which is now sold out), you'll see that #43 and #46 work for this thread.

 

Stuart states that he enjoys meeting fans at the shows he attends but due to some unfortunate and negative experiences over the years, he has chosen not to sketch at shows. Sorry you weren't able to get a sketch as hoped mate.

 

He will do a "freebie" or quick sketch at cons but not something along the lines of what I'm guessing you were hoping for. He has also done more detailed pieces for charity at various shows.

 

I've known Stuart for over 20 years so I've been lucky to pick up a sketch early on along with pieces of his work over the years, including some amazing and generous gifts. Warm regards,

 

Royd

 

 

 

 

Adam Hughes is one, Frank Cho is another (although he has sketched at a few shows recently), Stuart Immonen is yet another and there are more.

 

So thats why he wouldnt do a sketch in my book. I BEGGED, with cash in hand, to no avail!

[heartened]

I've seen a few recent examples of flipping (for this discussion, I define "flipping" as buying OA and within a few days placing it on eBay for significantly inflated prices) that made me wonder if this is good for the hobby. I've seen OA pages that sold for $60 being offered for $300-$400. I've seen color guides that sold for less than $5 per page being offered for sale for $30-$100 per page. If it were selling, I would probably applaud the flippers. I am seeing a huge amount of this art not moving and that concerns me. When a market sees artificial pressures like inflated pricing, it doesn't functional optimally. My question is this: does this type of reselling hurt the hobby in a macro sense and how big of an issue is it? In addition, what impact do you think it has on the market?

 

Also, if your comment mirrors any of the following, I respectfully ask that you keep it to yourself:

 

- Who cares? If you don't want to pay that price, don't buy the art.

- Dealers resell art all the time. This is no different.

- People are free to charge whatever they want.

 

Those comments are not original, nor are they productive for this discussion. I look forward to your responses.

 

It's all good. Welcome to capitalism. People shouldn't care what happens to art when it leaves their hands. Buyer beware. Seller beware. And, as for artists who refuse to sketch anymore because of flipping, I think they're missing the big picture. They should be happy they are so popular, and leave it at that.

 

[Royd]

Well, the question was whether Flippers are bad for the hobby, so.... if artists stop sketching because of instances of "flipping" then surely it's bad for the hobby?

 

Whether they're missing the big picture or not doesn't appear to be relevant if the end result is that they stop sketching

 

 

It's all good. Welcome to capitalism. People shouldn't care what happens to art when it leaves their hands. Buyer beware. Seller beware. And, as for artists who refuse to sketch anymore because of flipping, I think they're missing the big picture. They should be happy they are so popular, and leave it at that.