First Wolverine Page sells for $657,000!

[kbmcvay]

Does anybody think the final price of this piece would have been higher if it had been penciled by a bigger "name" than Trimpe (a John Romita or Neal Adams for example)? I do.

 

Actually, it WAS drawn by Romita

 

Trimpe swiped the entire image, line for line, from Romita's prelim. The prelim is also on CAF, for reference.

 

Interesting.

[tth2]

Does anybody think the final price of this piece would have been higher if it had been penciled by a bigger "name" than Trimpe (a John Romita or Neal Adams for example)? I do.

 

Maybe if Jeff Koons had drawn it.

 

But the WAY its drawn, with a big presentational image of Wolvie, is definitely a factor.

Absolutely. This price is all about which character is depicted in the page, the historical significance of the page and the character, and the fact that it's a pretty large image, particularly for a panel page.

 

The fact that a page by Herb Trimpe (Herb Trimpe!) is now tied for most expensive publicly confirmed US comic OA ever, and most expensive publicly confimed US comic interior page OA ever, by a wide margin, speaks volumes about the relative importance of the artist to this price. I don't think it would've become much more expensive, if at all, even if Byrne, Adams, Windsor-Smith, Steranko, Kirby, McFarlane, Lee etc had drawn it.

[inovrmihd]

I don't think this speaks volumes at all about the importance of subject matter over artist. This is an extremely special case where the artist played almost no significance. You can't extrapolate this to the hobby generally imo.

 

On another matter, sorry to beat a dead horse, but does anyone feel like there are three to five new guys to the hobby that are justifying some of these prices by looking at the multiples the rest of the art world is bringing. I am not tied in to the circuit, but I find it hard to believe it is the same crew that has been bidding these prices up recently (unless it is all shill bidding and collectors trying to rerate the value of their collection) (if that is what is going on, please im me - I am the chump at teh poker table and would appreciate the heads up). I know Gene has been emphatic that they are totally different worlds, and I agree with him, but speaking for myself (and I have been largely priced out), when I made the plunge a few years ago, I said to myself that if my business partner was spending $xxx on the piece of sh*t he hung up on the office wall, maybe spending 10-20% of that was reasonable for a piece of OA.

 

 

[pinupcartoonguy]

Does anybody think the final price of this piece would have been higher if it had been penciled by a bigger "name" than Trimpe (a John Romita or Neal Adams for example)? I do.

 

Actually, it WAS drawn by Romita

 

Trimpe swiped the entire image, line for line, from Romita's prelim. The prelim is also on CAF, for reference.

 

So technically, could you say breakdowns by Romita a la Frank Miller on the later issues of his Daredevil run?

[tth2]

I don't think this speaks volumes at all about the importance of subject matter over artist. This is an extremely special case where the artist played almost no significance. You can't extrapolate this to the hobby generally imo.

I wasn't.

 

I said "speaks volumes about the relative importance of the artist to this price"

 

[tth2]

Does anybody think the final price of this piece would have been higher if it had been penciled by a bigger "name" than Trimpe (a John Romita or Neal Adams for example)? I do.

 

Actually, it WAS drawn by Romita

 

Trimpe swiped the entire image, line for line, from Romita's prelim. The prelim is also on CAF, for reference.

 

So technically, could you say breakdowns by Romita a la Frank Miller on the later issues of his Daredevil run?

The piece could've been drawn by Frank Robbins or Don Heck at one end of the spectrum, or Neal Adams or Jim Steranko at the other end of the spectrum, and the price probably would've been about the same.,

[Bronty]

Does anybody think the final price of this piece would have been higher if it had been penciled by a bigger "name" than Trimpe (a John Romita or Neal Adams for example)? I do.

 

Actually, it WAS drawn by Romita

 

Trimpe swiped the entire image, line for line, from Romita's prelim. The prelim is also on CAF, for reference.

 

So technically, could you say breakdowns by Romita a la Frank Miller on the later issues of his Daredevil run?

 

Nah. Romita's piece is just a character design (front and back). Not panel breakdowns.

 

And fWIW I wouldn't call it romita swipe, that's just Trimpe respecting his boss and taking instructions. It's open art direction as opposed to "thievery."

 

I know one thing, the owner of the romita piece is pleased with the auction result !

[delekkerste]

On another matter, sorry to beat a dead horse, but does anyone feel like there are three to five new guys to the hobby that are justifying some of these prices by looking at the multiples the rest of the art world is bringing. I am not tied in to the circuit, but I find it hard to believe it is the same crew that has been bidding these prices up recently (unless it is all shill bidding and collectors trying to rerate the value of their collection) (if that is what is going on, please im me - I am the chump at teh poker table and would appreciate the heads up).

 

IMO, you are looking at the right pieces, but have drawn the wrong conclusion. Is there new blood coming into the hobby? I would suspect so - people who are new and starting from scratch are more likely to overpay as they are learning the ropes and as they are eager to get those first several pieces under their belts.

 

Are people justifying record OA prices in part by looking at the prices the rest of the art world is bringing (never mind that these headline grabbers represent the top 0.001% of art out there)? Yes, but I think it's largely the existing collector base that is doing that, not new crossover collectors from fine art (or newbies who use fine art as a reference point) who somehow view OA as cheap by comparison. Case in point - talking to the buyer of the Hulk #180 page over the weekend, he referenced the $84 million Barnett Newman Black Fire sale last week at Christie's and compared contemporary art prices to comic art prices (and he is a longtime, established OA collector). Many people on these Boards have done similarly - just witness the discussion we've been having about the $28 million Koons Popeye, which some have highlighted to show how cheap/how much potential OA is/has by comparison.

 

I think the reality is that there is new blood coming into the hobby, but much of the increase in prices is coming from existing collectors stretching harder and farther every year to keep pace in this market. I think that stratospheric fine art prices are certainly one component people have used to rationalize paying ever-higher prices, though I suspect the near-ubiquity (or near-saturation if you're a skeptic) of superheroes in pop culture these days has played an even bigger role, as people have extrapolated this to mean that these characters will be insanely popular for generations to come and that people will always want to pay top dollar for historically and artistically significant pieces of OA (not surprisingly, I don't agree).

 

But, it's OK if you're nodding your head in agreement; it's definitely the consensus thinking in the hobby these days from my discussions and interactions with dozens of other collectors.

[RockMyAmadeus]

Does anybody think the final price of this piece would have been higher if it had been penciled by a bigger "name" than Trimpe (a John Romita or Neal Adams for example)? I do.

 

Maybe if Jeff Koons had drawn it.

 

But the WAY its drawn, with a big presentational image of Wolvie, is definitely a factor.

Absolutely. This price is all about which character is depicted in the page, the historical significance of the page and the character, and the fact that it's a pretty large image, particularly for a panel page.

 

The fact that a page by Herb Trimpe (Herb Trimpe!) is now tied for most expensive publicly confirmed US comic OA ever, and most expensive publicly confimed US comic interior page OA ever, by a wide margin, speaks volumes about the relative importance of the artist to this price. I don't think it would've become much more expensive, if at all, even if Byrne, Adams, Windsor-Smith, Steranko, Kirby, McFarlane, Lee etc had drawn it.

 

 

I said nearly the same thing, in another thread.....

 

[suspense39]

"though I suspect the near-ubiquity (or near-saturation if you're a skeptic) of superheroes in pop culture these days has played an even bigger role, as people have extrapolated this to mean that these characters will insanely popular for generations to come and that people will always want to pay top dollar for historically and artistically significant pieces of OA (not surprisingly, I don't agree)."

 

This makes sense and I have heard this rationalization from collectors as well

[RockMyAmadeus]

I went to a conference a couple of weeks ago where Nina Paley did a great presentation -- she's taken quilting to a new artistic level, adapting software and hardware to make quilts that couldn't be done before. She's doing a series of $10,000 bills - which are for sale for, I think, face value

 

For a second, I almost thought she was quilting with actual $10,000 bills....

 

[drdroom]

The piece could've been drawn by Frank Robbins or Don Heck at one end of the spectrum, or Neal Adams or Jim Steranko at the other end of the spectrum, and the price probably would've been about the same.,

 

Frank Robbins?!? That would be AWESOME

[tth2]

The piece could've been drawn by Frank Robbins or Don Heck at one end of the spectrum, or Neal Adams or Jim Steranko at the other end of the spectrum, and the price probably would've been about the same.,

 

Frank Robbins?!? That would be AWESOME

If by "AWESOME" you mean being willing to drive steak knives into my eyes so I wouldn't have to look at his drawings ever again, then yes.

[inovrmihd]

Gene, that is the part I am having trouble with. Long time OA collector notices superhero cultural saturation and from there assumes that Kirby / Sinnot Thing transformation page will always be in great demand? I get that cultural fascination means Koons can sell more statues, but to go from there to there will always be great interest in the historical /artistic merit of an OA page seems like a helluva stretch. Put aside for the moment the Hulk 180 page which was truly historic. Have you had occasion to talk to the buyers of some of the buyers of the less historic (except when it comes to price) pages from the auction. I would love to hear how they are rationalizing prices. I won't single out any names, but I think the Hulk price was entirely rational in my opinion compared to where lesser pieces were selling for.

 

Sorry if I am beating a dead horse, but it is the middle of the night and I love talking about this stuff.

[delekkerste]

Gene, that is the part I am having trouble with. Long time OA collector notices superhero cultural saturation and from there assumes that Kirby / Sinnot Thing transformation page will always be in great demand? I get that cultural fascination means Koons can sell more statues, but to go from there to there will always be great interest in the historical /artistic merit of an OA page seems like a helluva stretch.

 

It might be a stretch to you and me, but, trust me when I say that this is the overwhelming consensus opinion in the hobby right now. Now, not everyone might agree that, say, a Ron Wilson Thing transformation page will always be in great demand, but nearly everyone believes that a Kirby/Sinnott page of such will be. Hell, most would argue that Kirby/Sinnott FF pieces will only become regarded as more historic and of greater artistic merit in the future - just look at how many people here believe this material will eventually end up in the great museums of the world.

 

Several longtime collectors have even argued as much here on the Boards - remember Hari's anecdote/argument recently about how his son and most of his friends dressed up as superheroes for Halloween, and that, with so many people being exposed to and falling in love with (ubiquitous) superheroes these days, surely some of them will seek out at least the most important and historic representations of these characters in the future. Now, Hari will be the first to concede that future generations may or may not always seek out, say, Grendel or Mage OA, maybe not even Miracleman, but I suspect that he and the vast majority of collectors believe that the top-tier vintage art from Marvel and DC (especially with the former under the steady hand of Disney) will remain not only relevant, but will only increase in prominence for the foreseeable future.

 

 

Put aside for the moment the Hulk 180 page which was truly historic. Have you had occasion to talk to the buyers of some of the buyers of the less historic (except when it comes to price) pages from the auction. I would love to hear how they are rationalizing prices. I won't single out any names, but I think the Hulk price was entirely rational in my opinion compared to where lesser pieces were selling for.

 

I actually did meet and speak recently with a relative newbie to the hobby recently, one who has been fairly active in the $20-$50K segment of the market over the past year. He is a lifelong comics fan, though is also savvy with the fine art market. He is very much of the belief that comic art is still cheap even at these levels, and is a firm believer that it will eventually catch on with fine art collectors and, especially, the celebrity crowd (Jay-Z was an example he used). I kind of got the impression, though, that to justify the prices he's been paying to get a foot in the door, he almost has to believe this, because the alternative is to accept that you're paying record prices for an art form enjoying peak exposure and nostalgia and that future price potential may not be so rosy.

 

But, it's not like guys like this are the ones scooping up all the pages that are fetching record prices. By and large, it's guys who are already in the hobby who, like I said, are stretching harder and farther to keep pace with the market (and I would definitely include myself in this camp). I mean, how many people here who regularly buy $5K+ art haven't paid a high/record price for something over the past couple of years? We're all doing it, and we all rationalize it in our own way, whether casting our lot with future generations exposed to the ubiquity of superheroes, comparing OA prices with fine art prices, or just accepting that it's the price of being involved in this hobby we all love.

[vodou]

Observation: The wealthier (or more obsessed) a collector gets, the less he looks back.

 

Let me explain. Having moved through many collecting hobbies over decades...I've never seen a collector move from a lower-end segment to a higher-end, then as income/wealth stagnates (as it does for us all eventually, just a matter of time), go back to the less expensive, more common examples or even whole hobbies. Think of the things you dreamed of as a kid, one day owning...a complete run of whatever books you were into at the time. The rookie card of whatever player was hot, or retiring, or entering the HOF. Stamps. Etc. You made lawn-mowing money, your income defined your collecting dreams. You grew up, made a lot more, your new income re-defined your collecting dreams. Then you were laid off, got a lower-paying job, retired. Did you go back to those $10 comics and $5 cards? How about those $10 mixed lots of international stamps? Or a lifetime subscription to Playboy? No. No. And no.

 

After paying $50k for a splash, $100k for a cover, who's going back to filling in $200 panel pages? Apply to yourself with any numbers and items you're into. I've seen the income and dream cycle play out within myself and many, many others, again over decades and so many different hobbies. Nobody goes back. They move forward, until they can't anymore, then quit. And are usually restless for a bit and die. Or just die.

 

These fast-moving price increases are alienating decent swathes of old and current generation collectors at every record auction. Prices are increasing much faster than incomes and even 'stored' wealth in the form of our collections. You either chase or you quit. You don't go back to a more affordable part of the hobby or a more affordable hobby. You don't drop nice OA for common stamps. Similarly, nobody is "selling the top" of OA to "buy the bottom" of every rookie card dead mint from the 70s-90s. A lot of us could, easily, but what we once wanted..oh so badly...who gives an eff now, right? Better to be a small fish in a big pond, than the opposite.

 

Contemporary high-end collectors used to paying millions (or even hundreds of thousands on 'aspirational' contemp) aren't going to slum in comic art. It's going backwards. Those dreams (if they ever existed) of buying a complete run of FF in "mint" or a Kirby/Sinnott cover died after they nailed financing to build their first condo complex. That's when they celebrated with a 'small' Basquiat (or what have you). And from that point on it's been a chase (and re-positioning) for bigger and better. Bigger Basquiats. Move up to a major Warhol, trade a few of those and some cash for a mid-range Picasso or two. And on it goes. See the pattern? Then the financing dries up along with commercial real estate, so they sell the collection (along with the mansion and vacation homes) to even up with the Wall St mafia, and most definitely DO NOT go back to cornering the market on "mint" (today: CGC 9.6) FF 48-50s or that Kirby/Sinnott cover (heck...not even a splash is of interest). Those things...having them, chasing them, would be a daily reminder of how far they've fallen. Even though they can easily afford them (sold only 3 of the 5 luxury Manhattan condos, still got 2), "no thanks", no interest whatsoever. Get it?

 

You may just find one guy, a real hard-scrabble runt outta Brooklyn (or Passaic!) that really made it happen -on HIS terms- and never forgot his roots, that is the exception to all this. But you won't find ten guys. And that's what it would take to keep the market moving on 'new blood' outside the hobby. And who would they sell to anyway? (Trust me -everybody UP THERE is always thinking about who they'll sell to, inter-generational wealth building is a very rare thing these days). Their filthy-rich friends that came even later to the party? No. Not unless you're talking real trend change, which requires an incredible pitchman (really several) on par with Stan Lee to create a new market. I tend to agree with Gene's 'existing stretching further' argument than new Wall St or West Coast developer money coming on board to scoop up all "the OA deals".

[vodou]

Observation: New money builds new museums. Old money scoffs, ignores, then begrudgingly plays catch up.

 

Want to see comic art in a museum? Build one and finance it's operation in perpetuity. This is the only way it's going to happen. Think of the great contemporary (of their day) museums, and then think of the name hanging over the front entrance. Guggenheim. Getty. Gardner. Et al. They were all collectors that embraced 'new' art that wasn't being adopted by the status quo. (And even so Isabella famously avoided Impressionist works by Degas!) So they built their own and stuffed them full of their own collections. Only much later, with new and younger boards throwing money around, did the old school museums play (and pay up for) catch up. And even then, dragged in kicking and screaming. This is why the oldest are so weak in 20th century art. And it's why we're so rich in comic art and nobody else is!

[MisterX]

Really interesting post, thanks, aelhra.

[delekkerste]

And, it's precisely because it's the existing collector base that is largely stretching ever-farther to buy art that I am not as sanguine on the potential for price appreciation as many in the hobby. How many collectors can shell out $250K+ for covers that were $100K two years ago? Is $30K the new $10K and $100K the new $25K? Are all A+ covers now $500K+? Is the floor on Ditko ASM complete stories $1.5 million? Sure, there are a few whales and sharks at the top of the food chain who will pay these prices, but even they can only take down so much.

 

I know many collectors who are lamenting being priced out of the market segment they have played in for years (or are close to it). I know that I am only willing to play ball up to a certain point - it's not that I can't afford to continue, but, when I see a Hulk #180 page sell for $657K, I don't compare it to a $28 million Koons or an $84 million Newman and think it's cheap; I see a price close to double what a pristine, all-original vintage Ferrari Dino recently sold for at auction and a page which is selling for more than its weight in flawless diamonds and think, "surely not!"

 

I think it's something a lot of people are grappling with these days, even those who are more bullish than I am. I find myself often thinking that prices these days are stupid...and then I end up talking to one of my BSD friends in the hobby and suddenly it's, "yeah, I can and should be buying more!" It's not easy being a high-end OA collector these days, that's for sure.

[delekkerste]

Really interesting post, thanks, aelhra.

 

Yes, a hugely insightful and well thought-out post!