With Hard Asset Prices Plummeting, What's Next for the OA Market?

[Bronty]

I don't care for byrne x-men (nice art but I don't like the story) but the FF run is awesome

[drdroom]

With the ASM #328 cover I'm sure the guys at Metro bought this knowing that they have a few rabid collectors/client's who will eventually pay $1M dollars for it a few years from now. Personally I wouldn't pay $10K for it as I think McFarlane's art is so overrated and while his contribution to the industry at the time was substantial for me it was the best of the worst during the most forgettable decade in comics, the 90's.

 

I have trouble thinking that they'd pay so much above the otherwise FMV just on a hope and prayer that in a few years they can flip it. I have to believe they have a much more concrete plan

 

I agree but a quick search of the Heritage archives most expensive OA pieces and you can't help but shake your head. Give me 10 classic Buscema and Byrne covers instead any day of the week!

 

Well, this just illustrates the craziness of this market, based on tastes which are highly generational. For my money there are just about ten classic Buscema covers, total, all pre-'72, and nothing from Byrne holds any interest for me. And, I KNOW IN MY BALLS THAT I AM RIGHT. And so, I am no doubt, missing a zillion terrific investment opportunities, because I can't stand to put money down on stuff I don't believe in. I think I just explained to myself why I am likely to be eaten alive...

Who here buys based on value trends? In other words, who here, pro dealers excepted, has bought a piece by an artist you can't stand, purely as an investment?

 

Really? No Byrne X-Men, FF or even Avengers? As far as Buscema goes his work on the Avengers from issue #254-#300 was some great stuff. For me its all classic.

 

Really. To me, Byrne is Pat Boone to Neal Adam's Little Richard. I've heard that people love the stories but I didn't read them, so Byrne rises or falls on his drawing alone for me.

[inovrmihd]

Getting back on topic, while I don't think the price of hard assets (that are treated like asset classes) is very important for the high end of the market, I do think zipr is. I think there is a lot of merit to Delek's past argument that a lot of people say to themselves "where else can I put my money".

[gambron]

Personal preference, I suppose. While I find the art to be dynamic during his stint at Marvel in the 60's, I think the art is very 'blocky' and Lord knows I've tried to understand the appeal of it all, but I find the artwork to be primative and even ugly once the mid 70s through the 80s.

 

I grew up reading the Bronze-Age books and wasn't really exposed to Kirby

until much later when I began reading more "expensive" Silver-Age books and of course collecting art. His place in history is undeniable, however, stylistically I can understand him being an acquired taste for some including myself. That said over time I began to appreciate the bold, primal power his work conveys. It's almost as if his work has an "Expressionist" quality when compared to classical comic illustrators, that I find so incredibly appealing. It took me a while to really "get it" but once I did, Kirby became and remains my favorite comic book artist. To me he truly deserves the nickname "The King". But hey, maybe i'm nuts

[lb jefferies]

Personal preference, I suppose. While I find the art to be dynamic during his stint at Marvel in the 60's, I think the art is very 'blocky' and Lord knows I've tried to understand the appeal of it all, but I find the artwork to be primative and even ugly once the mid 70s through the 80s.

 

I grew up reading the Bronze-Age books and wasn't really exposed to Kirby

until much later when I began reading more "expensive" Silver-Age books and of course collecting art. His place in history is undeniable, however, stylistically I can understand him being an acquired taste for some including myself. That said over time I began to appreciate the bold, primal power his work conveys. It's almost as if his work has an "Expressionist" quality when compared to classical comic illustrators, that I find so incredibly appealing. It took me a while to really "get it" but once I did, Kirby became and remains my favorite comic book artist. To me he truly deserves the nickname "The King". But hey, maybe i'm nuts

 

Almost exactly my experience, too.

 

If I had to buy 5 more pieces and then quit the hobby I'd want all 5 to be Kirby.

[Bronty]

nice way of putting it.

[Silver Surfer]

With the ASM #328 cover I'm sure the guys at Metro bought this knowing that they have a few rabid collectors/client's who will eventually pay $1M dollars for it a few years from now. Personally I wouldn't pay $10K for it as I think McFarlane's art is so overrated and while his contribution to the industry at the time was substantial for me it was the best of the worst during the most forgettable decade in comics, the 90's.

 

I have trouble thinking that they'd pay so much above the otherwise FMV just on a hope and prayer that in a few years they can flip it. I have to believe they have a much more concrete plan

 

I agree but a quick search of the Heritage archives most expensive OA pieces and you can't help but shake your head. Give me 10 classic Buscema and Byrne covers instead any day of the week!

 

Well, this just illustrates the craziness of this market, based on tastes which are highly generational. For my money there are just about ten classic Buscema covers, total, all pre-'72, and nothing from Byrne holds any interest for me. And, I KNOW IN MY BALLS THAT I AM RIGHT. And so, I am no doubt, missing a zillion terrific investment opportunities, because I can't stand to put money down on stuff I don't believe in. I think I just explained to myself why I am likely to be eaten alive...

Who here buys based on value trends? In other words, who here, pro dealers excepted, has bought a piece by an artist you can't stand, purely as an investment?

 

Really? No Byrne X-Men, FF or even Avengers? As far as Buscema goes his work on the Avengers from issue #254-#300 was some great stuff. For me its all classic.

 

Really. To me, Byrne is Pat Boone to Neal Adam's Little Richard. I've heard that people love the stories but I didn't read them, so Byrne rises or falls on his drawing alone for me.

 

If nothing else read the FF run and of course his brief Cap run especially the Baron Blood arc, fantastic stuff all around.

[Dan.Adrians]

I've always held the same opinion about Jack Kirby, just never really voiced it. I can appreciate what he did for the industry as a whole, but I was never really a fan of his art. I guess it's like a fine wine, my pallette hasn't quite matured yet to that level. Love Byrne, Perez, Art Adams. Eighties guys. My 2 cents.

[Kevin76]

And I'm guessing, looking at your want list, that you didn't grow up reading Kirby, and that your nostalgia sweet spot is the '80s and beyond.

 

For the most part, you are correct. However, I also didn't like Ditko artwork when I started reading comics, but I've come to appreciate his artwork. Kirby still hasn't registered for me.

 

Likewise, there's some artists' work I loved in the 80's, but don't really care much for it today.

 

Whether its art, food, cars and women, I guess tastes change over time.

 

Sounds like you don't like the thick lines, I didn't like them either when i was like 17, but taste changes over time as well as understanding the art itself, It wasn't Kirby's style that made Kirby, it was his layouts, his designs, characters that "leap off the page" if you will as well as his energy that he brought to the page. Mcfarlane was able to bring the a lot energy to the page, but he did a lot of thin lines that made his style look amazing. Nobody can draw Thor better than Kirby!

 

I could never get into Ditko myself but I understand his placement in comics history, It just doesn't "speak to me" It doesn't get me fired up when I look at it.

[dgarthwaite-migration]

I've always held the same opinion about Jack Kirby, just never really voiced it. I can appreciate what he did for the industry as a whole, but I was never really a fan of his art. I guess it's like a fine wine, my pallette hasn't quite matured yet to that level. Love Byrne, Perez, Art Adams. Eighties guys. My 2 cents.

 

I never really understood the Kirby praise until I actually made an attempt to draw comic art. Kirby is like a template for any artist to compose a panel or page. If you aren't sure how to draw something or get a certain perspective, he's not only done it before but he's done it well. Many popular artists would cite Kirby as a big inspiration. I think Stan Lee was also the ultimate at marketing and hype.

 

DG

[delekkerste]

How long before the desire to hold cash outweighs the desire to own art at current prices?

 

Gold and silver are plummeting to fresh 2+ year lows, interest rates/mortgage rates have surged in recent weeks, commodity prices are getting smoked, the US dollar is surging in a flight-to-quality, and now global stock markets have abruptly tanked from their recent highs. This is bad, folks.

 

I asked, "How long before the desire to hold cash outweighs the desire to own art at current prices?" For me, personally, we just reached the tipping point today. As of this week, I think the macro landscape has become too dicey for me to want to keep spending big on OA at all-time high prices.*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Of course, there are always pieces that I would consider making exceptions for.

[suspense39]

My stocks definitely took a hit today! I hope it isn't too bad for anyone out there. I think I'm just gong to sit back and watch OA market for a while......see what happens

[DJRome]

 

It's rough out there, no doubt about it. The thought of central banks tapering their purchases is enough to bring most (all?) markets down hard. Ironically, this plunge could give the banks justification to cancel any tapering plans or even increase their stimulus programs.

 

Don't get me wrong, sooner or later the central banks will stop the printing presses. But they're only going to do that when it becomes painfully obvious that it doesn't work anymore. We're not at that stage yet, I think.

 

If you believe (as I do) that no one is going to take the punchbowl away, then any short term drop in pricing is a buying opportunity. Just be sure to get great examples of your area of interest. There's a lot of good material out there, so try not to settle for the mediocre stuff.

 

Please note, while I'm bullish on OA, I do worry about what these pieces will be worth in another 15 or so years. If you're buying with the intention of holding a piece for more than 20 years, don't plan on making any money on it. That stuff should be purchased for enjoyment value only.

[jjonahjameson1]

OMG! The sky is falling. Take cover, the sky is falling!

 

. Been there, done that.

[Silver Surfer]

How long before the desire to hold cash outweighs the desire to own art at current prices?

 

Gold and silver are plummeting to fresh 2+ year lows, interest rates/mortgage rates have surged in recent weeks, commodity prices are getting smoked, the US dollar is surging in a flight-to-quality, and now global stock markets have abruptly tanked from their recent highs. Stock brokers are going off on holidays, typical this time of year but will be back in September to really the markets up with some panic selling that will send the markets down the toliet. This is bad, folks.

 

I asked, "How long before the desire to hold cash outweighs the desire to own art at current prices?" For me, personally, we just reached the tipping point today. As of this week, I think the macro landscape has become too dicey for me to want to keep spending big on OA at all-time high prices.*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*Of course, there are always pieces that I would consider making exceptions for.

 

Fixed you above quote.

[vodou]

It's rough out there, no doubt about it. The thought of central banks tapering their purchases is enough to bring most (all?) markets down hard. Ironically, this plunge could give the banks justification to cancel any tapering plans or even increase their stimulus programs.

 

Don't get me wrong, sooner or later the central banks will stop the printing presses. But they're only going to do that when it becomes painfully obvious that it doesn't work anymore. We're not at that stage yet, I think.

All the printing CBs are diluting their currency in lieu of Treasuries raising revenue (taxes) on their populace. Since spending isn't going down, somebody has to buy the fresh debt paper. If it's not CBs, then who? Riiiiight. And there you go. Maybe the same operations under different names/cover but never going to end. Unless you think spending will shrink, deficits will disappear, actual debt (not just service) will be re-paid. Again, riiiight.

[Silver Surfer]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe we are coming into the end of the 7-year cycle where things historically go into the krapper?

[vodou]

Yes, 6-8 yrs. But which bubble is it this time? Or is it everything?

Meanwhile I spent more on art in the last 10 days that I have in 5 years. You only live once, and I've been doing very well in my other endeavors.

[Bronty]

Post the art !

[delekkerste]

OMG! The sky is falling. Take cover, the sky is falling!

 

. Been there, done that.

 

Past performance is no guarantee of future results, and if you only look in the rear-view mirror, you'll never see what's coming up the road.

 

I'm not telling anyone how to spend or not spend their money. All I'm saying is that the cognitive dissonance between what OA prices have been doing versus what other hard assets have been doing and what is going on in the economy and financial markets has reached the point this week where it's become impossible for me to ignore the elephant in the room. To me, it makes no sense that the price of real money - gold - is down nearly 30% from its 2011 peak while most high-end OA is probably up 20-30% since then (more, in some cases).

 

Whether people acknowledge it consciously or not, they have been spending what they have on OA at least in part because, "I'm earning 0% in the bank", "the dollar is becoming worthless", "the Fed is printing money so we will get inflation and you want to be in hard assets", etc. Some collectors, including at least a few on the Boards here, have been quite explicit about the connection between the macro picture and their OA buying motivations. People can't find anything better to do with their money, so they have been piling into a commodity they both know and love - comic art.

 

But, what happens when interest rates start to go up, like they are now? What happens when the dollar is rampaging higher instead of going down like it was a few years ago? What happens when gold plummets 30% and silver plummets 60% from where they were in 2011? What happens when the price of other hard assets have been falling for 2 years and you can no longer ignore it? What happens when cash is getting scarcer and more valuable by the hour? Might it not be prudent to question whether record OA prices are warranted when the price of money is going up and the price of other hard assets continues to deflate month after month?

 

I wonder if we will look back at the $500K purchase of the ASM #50 cover as the bell-ringing moment for this market. Or maybe it was last summer's ASM #328 sale - not like the market has gotten appreciably stronger as a whole since then outside of a handful of big acquisitions mostly by one individual.

 

- Gene