Heritage May 2014

[lb jefferies]

So who are the 3-4 folks that you guys think will go after this piece?

 

David Mandel has the GS X-Men 1 cover, so I think he'd be a no-brainer. Donnelly possibly also.

 

Who else?

 

 

 

 

I think most would be hesitant to actually throw names around. I will say that, without naming names, I would put the Spider-Man 1 buyer squarely on the list. That would be my first guess.

 

In all fairness, sfcityduck...care to tell us who you are and what you buy? I see nothing identifying you in your posts. Which is, of course, your right. But if you prefer some degree of anonymity and privacy, maybe you can understand why others might as well and extend them the same courtesy?

 

I am extremely respectful of anonymity and would not breach such confidences. However, Mandel and Donnelly both have public internet galleries in which they prominently display the art I am referencing under their real names. Mandel has also generously loaned his art, including the art I referenced, out to public institutions for display with the traditional "from the collection of" identification label for the art, and Donnelly runs an art business.

 

In short, neither has shown any interest in anonymity. So, your implied criticism of my post is not valid.

 

 

 

 

I didn't think "Donnelly" was a singular.

 

Yes, they're joined at the wallet

[Bronty]

Probably a british vs american english kind of thing. The 'crew are rowing' vs the 'crew is rowing'

[Bronty]

heheh

[Nexus]

And, no, I have no interest in sharing my identity publicly (although some board members know). I will tell you that I have previously disclosed that I have bought and sold Byrne-Austin X-Men art (and this Wolverine piece is extremely interesting to me). I own GA, SA, and BA comics, but really haven't been an active buyer of new comics, other than HC reprints of strip and Archive/Masterworks books, for many years. My collecting these days focuses on fine art.

 

That's all fine and dandy. But you are still, for all intents and purposes, anonymous. I appreciate those who share their collections publicly. I do not believe that they do this with the expectation that all their buying activity will be speculated about on an open forum. This has to be even more true for those who share nothing...and I have to believe you should be able to relate with that.

[Ironmandrd]

I don't think that it advances the thread to speculate which specific collectors people may think will be bidders (as opposed to the discussion about core OA collectors vs. potential bidders from other areas).

[GreatEscape]

Seeing how the Action #15 cover art drew bids from BSD GA collectors (and won by MrB), we might also expect one or three BSD Silver/Bronze comic collectors-- who routinely pay $50k+ for ultra-high grade comics-- to consider bidding especially with Heritage marketing engines at work.

[Pete Marino]

Seeing how the Action #15 cover art drew bids from BSD GA collectors (and won by MrB), we might also expect one or three BSD Silver/Bronze comic collectors-- who routinely pay $50k+ for ultra-high grade comics-- to consider bidding especially with Heritage marketing engines at work.

 

Out of curiosity, I just checked, a 9.8 181 is only 12k, and that's top of the food chain wolverine comics. Quite an order of magnitude difference to go after this page.

[delekkerste]

Seeing how the Action #15 cover art drew bids from BSD GA collectors (and won by MrB), we might also expect one or three BSD Silver/Bronze comic collectors-- who routinely pay $50k+ for ultra-high grade comics-- to consider bidding especially with Heritage marketing engines at work.

 

Any Silver Age comic guys would be more likely to experiment with Silver Age OA, no? Don't really see them going from buying, say, JIM #83s to buying Bronze OA. Realistically, I think only a BA/CA comic book collector would fit the profile, and given that nothing in that universe aside from the Hulk #181 9.9 would fetch even 1/10th of what this page is likely to sell for, I don't think we'll see much crossover bidding (at least not anything worth discussing).

[Koa]

So who are the 3-4 folks that you guys think will go after this piece?

 

David Mandel has the GS X-Men 1 cover, so I think he'd be a no-brainer. Donnelly possibly also.

 

Who else?

 

 

 

 

I think most would be hesitant to actually throw names around. I will say that, without naming names, I would put the Spider-Man 1 buyer squarely on the list. That would be my first guess.

 

In all fairness, sfcityduck...care to tell us who you are and what you buy? I see nothing identifying you in your posts. Which is, of course, your right. But if you prefer some degree of anonymity and privacy, maybe you can understand why others might as well and extend them the same courtesy?

 

I am extremely respectful of anonymity and would not breach such confidences. However, Mandel and Donnelly both have public internet galleries in which they prominently display the art I am referencing under their real names. Mandel has also generously loaned his art, including the art I referenced, out to public institutions for display with the traditional "from the collection of" identification label for the art, and Donnelly runs an art business.

 

In short, neither has shown any interest in anonymity. So, your implied criticism of my post is not valid.

 

 

 

 

If the market really is as thin as people are suggesting that's scary.

[sfcityduck]

Look, I'm interested in who might want to make a run at this piece. Mandel is an obvious candidate because of what he owns. Others folks on this forum speculated about Donelly (singular or plural). Some have blustered they know who the four big players will be. All I was asking was if anyone else knew and would report who they are. If you know of others who wish to remain anonymous and don't want to say their names out of respect of their anonymity -- that's great. I'm not criticizing anyone for keeping confidences am I? But, there's no harm in me asking the question, some not answering, or someone else who is not breaching any confidences from answering.

 

Richard Evans asked me on these boards if I was considering bidding on the Action 15. I plainly told him no. Nothing wrong with his question. Nothing wrong if he would have asked the board if they knew of anyone planning to bid. It might have been a smart play for info that would help him to decide whether it was worth pursuing the piece, who his opposition might be, and how that might impact price. Ultimately, the Action 15 went for far less than I thought it would given the Superman non-sale, but Bedrock probably had a good idea of what it would take. Kudos to him.

 

So I'm at a loss why any of you are criticizing anything I've typed here.

[Bronty]

So who are the 3-4 folks that you guys think will go after this piece?

 

David Mandel has the GS X-Men 1 cover, so I think he'd be a no-brainer. Donnelly possibly also.

 

Who else?

 

 

 

 

I think most would be hesitant to actually throw names around. I will say that, without naming names, I would put the Spider-Man 1 buyer squarely on the list. That would be my first guess.

 

In all fairness, sfcityduck...care to tell us who you are and what you buy? I see nothing identifying you in your posts. Which is, of course, your right. But if you prefer some degree of anonymity and privacy, maybe you can understand why others might as well and extend them the same courtesy?

 

I am extremely respectful of anonymity and would not breach such confidences. However, Mandel and Donnelly both have public internet galleries in which they prominently display the art I am referencing under their real names. Mandel has also generously loaned his art, including the art I referenced, out to public institutions for display with the traditional "from the collection of" identification label for the art, and Donnelly runs an art business.

 

In short, neither has shown any interest in anonymity. So, your implied criticism of my post is not valid.

 

 

 

 

If the market really is as thin as people are suggesting that's scary.

 

Umm at the several hundred thou for a drawing level? What do you expect? Its the nature of any collectible market that its thin at the top. That's why the top is the top At the 5, 10, 20k level its quite deep. multiply those figures by 10 and you reduce the bidders exponentially however

[heartened]

We're throwing around some big number estimates on this piece. Not sure that people are willing to pay Hulk 181 cover prices on this panel page just because the rest doesn't exist (or hasn't surfaced). I guess we shall see.

 

Nah, the Hulk #181 cover would sell in a whole other part of the stratosphere than the numbers we're talking about for this page.

 

What's the highest price so far for an interior first appearance page?

 

[Koa]

So who are the 3-4 folks that you guys think will go after this piece?

 

David Mandel has the GS X-Men 1 cover, so I think he'd be a no-brainer. Donnelly possibly also.

 

Who else?

 

 

 

 

I think most would be hesitant to actually throw names around. I will say that, without naming names, I would put the Spider-Man 1 buyer squarely on the list. That would be my first guess.

 

In all fairness, sfcityduck...care to tell us who you are and what you buy? I see nothing identifying you in your posts. Which is, of course, your right. But if you prefer some degree of anonymity and privacy, maybe you can understand why others might as well and extend them the same courtesy?

 

I am extremely respectful of anonymity and would not breach such confidences. However, Mandel and Donnelly both have public internet galleries in which they prominently display the art I am referencing under their real names. Mandel has also generously loaned his art, including the art I referenced, out to public institutions for display with the traditional "from the collection of" identification label for the art, and Donnelly runs an art business.

 

In short, neither has shown any interest in anonymity. So, your implied criticism of my post is not valid.

 

 

 

 

If the market really is as thin as people are suggesting that's scary.

 

Umm at the several hundred thou for a drawing level? What do you expect? Its the nature of any collectible market that its thin at the top. That's why the top is the top At the 5, 10, 20k level its quite deep. multiply those figures by 10 and you reduce the bidders exponentially however

 

I'm not talking about just 100k up Bronty, stop being such a sarcastic mess. It's a conversation killer. From what I understand there are quite a few collectors who could play ball at this level. they choose not to. Don't you wonder why that is?

.

 

[DocR]

 

If the market really is as thin as people are suggesting that's scary.

 

It is this observation that I would love to hear opinions on. Are there really only 4 or 5 guys that are even players for the 180 and like pages. That is discomforting to me if it is true.

[Koa]

 

If the market really is as thin as people are suggesting that's scary.

 

It is this observation that I would love to hear opinions on. Are there really only 4 or 5 guys that are even players for the 180 and like pages. That is discomforting to me if it is true.

 

I hear about these "black hole" collectors. Guys who bought up art cheap in the 70's and 80's. Others who "liberated" stacks of art from marvel and DC. They are more than 2 or 3 guys. I wonder why more of them don't sell off portions of their lesser art to fund runs at auctions like this.

[DocR]

If I was sitting on say 20 1960-s 70s pages I paid 50 or 100 or less for each and that would sell for 10-20k each I would certainly consider what you are suggesting. The appeal of this page is that high for me. gene made an interesting point though. Is someone who is sitting on silver age pages purchased at a ridiculously low cost basis even interested in a wolvie page.

[CollectingFool]

I hear about these "black hole" collectors. Guys who bought up art cheap in the 70's and 80's. Others who "liberated" stacks of art from marvel and DC. They are more than 2 or 3 guys. I wonder why more of them don't sell off portions of their lesser art to fund runs at auctions like this.

 

What makes you think they don't? Not every sale is public and not everyone is willing to share information. This is especially true when the information may lead to a treasure trove of artwork.

 

[sfcityduck]

Guys who bought cheap in the 70s and 80s (could be any era of art) and have been sitting on those pages for the past 30+ years, would seem to either be true collectors who enjoy what they have or are in it for the long-term investment or most likely both. Not sure why'd they'd liquidate a bunch of pages that will never depreciate from what they paid and are likely to increase in value (picking up a tax bill in the process) just to flip the money into a piece that may end up being overpriced due to the bidding war, especially if they are going to sell it again in a few years (picking up another tax bill) to fund their retirement.

 

 

[MrBedrock]

Richard Evans asked me on these boards if I was considering bidding on the Action 15. I plainly told him no. Nothing wrong with his question. Nothing wrong if he would have asked the board if they knew of anyone planning to bid. It might have been a smart play for info that would help him to decide whether it was worth pursuing the piece, who his opposition might be, and how that might impact price. Ultimately, the Action 15 went for far less than I thought it would given the Superman non-sale, but Bedrock probably had a good idea of what it would take. Kudos to him.

 

I asked you if you had an interest in bidding because you spent a tremendous amount of energy questioning the authenticity of the cover, or aspects of the cover.

[sfcityduck]

Bedrock,

 

Fair enough. To be clear though, I said over and over on that thread that I thought your now new possession was authentic. In fact, the actual immediate sequence of our posts on that thread was:

 

Me posting: "I also agree the line breaks for the shark outline are a great indicator the art is real."

 

You posting: "Mr. Duck, I understand questioning the authenticity of the piece in regard to the good of the hobby or as a mental exercise, but given some the assumptions and facts do you have any plans to bid on it if it is proven without a doubt to be real?"

 

Me posting: "I've owned and sold original art, but have no interest in bidding on the piece and I really hope my opinions have no impact whatsoever on the auction (and I'm sure they won't). Greater resources than I'd be willing to spend will be required if the war is going to be between Fishler, Halperin, Mehdy, etc. All I'm doing here is talking through an issue I find really fascinating: art forgery. And I'm glad I've been part of this conversation as I've learned a lot, especially the tidbits about the 80s forger. My opinion on this art is that it is almost certainly real. The stats I'm far less sure of. I don't think I've made any hard factual assumptions, I do think my "thinking out loud" includes a number of opinions and speculations, some which have changed during the course of the conversation. That's sort of the point of conversation -- to learn new things and take on board others' opinions -- leading to new insights and views."

 

You then later posted: "I agree, and thanks for that. I was just curious."

 

So, you can understand why I speculated here why you might have posed what I thought was a perfectly legit question. It wasn't exactly clear why you asked.

 

Frankly, I am interested in the Wolverine page. And I really don't think it should go for more than your Action 15 page (which I think was a very good price). So I'm fishing for information, and I really don't see how anything I posted should offend anyone.