Heritage Auction November 2014

[Bronty]

I know it was a good auction for whoever bought my Wally Wood Sally Forths (I'm taking a 53% hit on those) and my Enric painting.

As you`re finding out the hard way, the audience for that kind of art is limited because a lot of married collectors` wives simply won`t let them buy it (or at least would be very unhappy if they did).

 

Bingo!

 

That's a factor but there are gory or sexy pieces collectors would love to have in their portfolios. to me the bigger issue is that most collectors have very limited connection to Sally forth. The only thing to interest them in the piece is the fact that it's wood; you need more than that. Artist and image quality are only going to take you so far. The subject matter/date/place of publication has to have appeal to the collector base otherwise there's going to be a cap on what the piece can attract in the marketplace. That's true IMO of Sally forth, of unpublished enrics, and of any host of other things that look good but have limited subject matter appeal. Despite protestations that they are in it for the art alone, when people make their purchase decisions they gravitate to whatever subject matter pulls them in hardest. I dare say that the subject matter encompassed in the artist's career is often what makes or breaks the artist's popularity in the first place.

 

In some of the Lichty discussion there was some mocking of people collecting pretty pictures in the context of fine art. Well, I'm not sure it's any different in illustration. A pretty picture alone is only going to go so far 99% of the time.

 

 

[Filter81]

So whats the consensus on the vellum avengers 118 going for 65k?

 

I thought it went cheap compared to some of the other covers, but I'm biased..

 

 

[vodou]

I know it was a good auction for whoever bought my Wally Wood Sally Forths (I'm taking a 53% hit on those) and my Enric painting.

As you`re finding out the hard way, the audience for that kind of art is limited because a lot of married collectors` wives simply won`t let them buy it (or at least would be very unhappy if they did).

 

Bingo!

 

That's a factor but there are gory or sexy pieces collectors would love to have in their portfolios. to me the bigger issue is that most collectors have very limited connection to Sally forth. The only thing to interest them in the piece is the fact that it's wood; you need more than that. Artist and image quality are only going to take you so far. The subject matter/date/place of publication has to have appeal to the collector base otherwise there's going to be a cap on what the piece can attract in the marketplace. That's true IMO of Sally forth, of unpublished enrics, and of any host of other things that look good but have limited subject matter appeal. Despite protestations that they are in it for the art alone, when people make their purchase decisions they gravitate to whatever subject matter pulls them in hardest. I dare say that the subject matter encompassed in the artist's career is often what makes or breaks the artist's popularity in the first place.

 

In some of the Lichty discussion there was some mocking of people collecting pretty pictures in the context of fine art. Well, I'm not sure it's any different in illustration. A pretty picture alone is only going to go so far 99% of the time.

 

I think it's a little more specific than this. For certain artists, maybe all?, there are unique characteristics that set up against the collector. And they aren't the same across the board.

 

For Wood, it's going to be nostalgia first (EC all day long, the rest except Spirit, far far out tied for third), eye appeal second. Zero nostalgia for Sally Forth (well not zero, but close enough I think). And eye appeal is good but not great. Too close in career path to his later full-on porno works. That stuff full-on or short of, just isn't what collectors with deep pockets want. I think we all know that a sixty year old EC sci-fi page polluted with hotties is the top dollar here. And that's not what Sally Forth is.

 

Enric(h) is similar but different. It pretty much has to be published Warren to pull big money. And even so, I think there is a broader lag in Warren right now anyway. At least when compared to five to ten years ago, Warren was pretty hot then, not as much now. So this is a great visual piece, but big (not everybody wants big), somewhat damaged, rolled (thus requiring end-user re-stretch), zero nostalgia, and recent...so all eye appeal with aforementioned detractors. Mostly suffers from competing with a lot of other artwork that's available all day, every day. It might have worked better as a "best offer" situation on eBay, but then again may have taken a year or two to sell even then. This sale didn't do Enric any favors either, as far as continuing to ask five figures for gallery scale commissions. Ideally the painting would have stayed on the books but unhung, loss unrealized, which does support the idea that art investment looks so good on paper because the dogs are kept (loss unrealized) and the winners sold...giving an overly bullish market perception.

 

Maybe I'm trying to hard. Maybe it's as simple as these are two pieces you buy when there isn't enough money or quality supply to buy better. Fillers, nice as they are, but fillers. And these days for both artists there is enough supply of top pieces around annually, if not in every major sale...and credit is cheaper and (seemingly) more abundant than ever.

[Filter81]

Anyone targeting anything coming up in a few minutes? Or is today the day to pick up bargains?

[drdroom]

Yes, we are targeting stuff!!

[drdroom]

EC color guides pulling down big dollars right now.

[delekkerste]

That's a factor but there are gory or sexy pieces collectors would love to have in their portfolios. to me the bigger issue is that most collectors have very limited connection to Sally forth. The only thing to interest them in the piece is the fact that it's wood; you need more than that. Artist and image quality are only going to take you so far. The subject matter/date/place of publication has to have appeal to the collector base otherwise there's going to be a cap on what the piece can attract in the marketplace. That's true IMO of Sally forth, of unpublished enrics, and of any host of other things that look good but have limited subject matter appeal.

 

I hear what you're saying, but the issue I have is that this is not new information. All the above does is explain why Sally Forths have been selling mainly in the $2-4K range as opposed to $20-$40K for, say, Wood's Daredevil pages. It doesn't explain why I took a 53% haircut on these, my two best examples, as opposed to a very small haircut on the worst example I consigned to ComicLink a couple of auctions ago. It may just be bad timing, with too much other supply diverting cash away from secondary items like these at the moment. Or, maybe the market really isn't that liquid and the absence of 1 or 2 people can result in 50% declines in a relatively short period of time (I think I bought these in 2010).

 

Similarly, I get that I overpaid for the Enric painting, but the final price was still absurd, even taking everything people are saying into consideration. Like I said, if I had had any inkling that it could possibly sell this low, I would have cut the price and listed it at, say, $7-8K and fielded offers on eBay. Zero question in my mind that I would have gotten interest and a better price that way - I got multiple offers on the last Enric Vampi painting I listed on eBay, and that one was both bigger and damaged. So, I know there is interest in this material at a price higher than where it sold - someone simply got a bargain at my expense in this case.

[vodou]

So, I know there is interest in this material at a price higher than where it sold - someone simply got a bargain at my expense in this case.

So what you're saying, contrary to most people's opinion, is this is still a rather inefficient market?

[Tokay]

It felt like that there were few A+ pieces but plenty of mid-tier stuff in this auction. There was a lot of stuff I kind of liked, but I didn't get any of those pieces…just kind of got auction fatigue in trying to decide what to go for...

[Bird]

Underbidder on the Capp Sunday. I have a nice daily but an early Sunday will be nice. Must be absolutely huge to hold.

 

If I end up with the Everett Lucille Ball it will be auction fever.

 

Could happen. ;-)

[Bird]

$1080 after juice for Lucy! Nice piece whomever got her!

[delekkerste]

So, I know there is interest in this material at a price higher than where it sold - someone simply got a bargain at my expense in this case.

So what you're saying, contrary to most people's opinion, is this is still a rather inefficient market?

 

I don't think the OA market is efficient, especially the further you get away from the mainstream. I'd be surprised if you found any serious argument to the contrary within the hobby.

[Bird]

$7 million spent in one weekend, you are going to have cases where the art does not find the right dollar amount.

[vodou]

So, I know there is interest in this material at a price higher than where it sold - someone simply got a bargain at my expense in this case.

So what you're saying, contrary to most people's opinion, is this is still a rather inefficient market?

 

I don't think the OA market is efficient, especially the further you get away from the mainstream. I'd be surprised if you found any serious argument to the contrary within the hobby.

My definition may be different than yours, probably should have expanded a bit. I consider an efficient market to be one where there's little/no room for arbitrage. Inefficient being the reverse. I'm sure there are examples of short term arbitrage, but overall I don't see obvious and regular opportunity. (In comparison to other sandboxes I play in.) But you may be right about other people, there's plenty of passion in this hobby but also a lot of speculation at prices outpacing inflation and opportunity cost in other sectors. So maybe I'm the only one that won't pay up for (imo) fully-priced artwork?

[Brian Peck]

I own one Sally Forth and had been looking for a great example for a long times. I like the cheesecake and it is no where near his later porn work (ya thats what I would call it). I loved the Sally Forth Flash Gordon/Buck Rogers story. Good satire. I was lucky to pick up a great example when Anthony had like 20 strips for sale at SDCC 5 years back.

 

As for pieces today I won the Jonni Thunder #2 by Giordano. I always liked Jonni Thunder, even if this is his daughter taking over in a forgettable mini series. Its a nice Giordano, best from the limited series.

 

 

[Ares]

Most of the pieces I wanted went for more than twice my limit.. Oh well

[Ronan Killack]

I don't think the OA market is efficient, especially the further you get away from the mainstream. I'd be surprised if you found any serious argument to the contrary within the hobby.

 

In follow-up to Gene's comment, while I think the market on a macro basis certainly appears to be somewhat efficient, the 'market' for any given piece - at any given time - can number as low as 2-3 serious people...and maybe lower. That can lead to a decent amount of variability in outcomes - hence, the many 'surprise' data points to both the negative and positive in any given auction. Just my two cents, as well.

[Junkdrawer]

Gee I tried for a Bruce Timm sketch of Harley (unpublished & undated) $1800

 

What would he charge at a show?

[Bronty]

That's a factor but there are gory or sexy pieces collectors would love to have in their portfolios. to me the bigger issue is that most collectors have very limited connection to Sally forth. The only thing to interest them in the piece is the fact that it's wood; you need more than that. Artist and image quality are only going to take you so far. The subject matter/date/place of publication has to have appeal to the collector base otherwise there's going to be a cap on what the piece can attract in the marketplace. That's true IMO of Sally forth, of unpublished enrics, and of any host of other things that look good but have limited subject matter appeal.

 

I hear what you're saying, but the issue I have is that this is not new information. All the above does is explain why Sally Forths have been selling mainly in the $2-4K range as opposed to $20-$40K for, say, Wood's Daredevil pages. It doesn't explain why I took a 53% haircut on these, my two best examples, as opposed to a very small haircut on the worst example I consigned to ComicLink a couple of auctions ago. It may just be bad timing, with too much other supply diverting cash away from secondary items like these at the moment. Or, maybe the market really isn't that liquid and the absence of 1 or 2 people can result in 50% declines in a relatively short period of time (I think I bought these in 2010).

 

Similarly, I get that I overpaid for the Enric painting, but the final price was still absurd, even taking everything people are saying into consideration. Like I said, if I had had any inkling that it could possibly sell this low, I would have cut the price and listed it at, say, $7-8K and fielded offers on eBay. Zero question in my mind that I would have gotten interest and a better price that way - I got multiple offers on the last Enric Vampi painting I listed on eBay, and that one was both bigger and damaged. So, I know there is interest in this material at a price higher than where it sold - someone simply got a bargain at my expense in this case.

 

Aha, I hear you. I see what you mean about it not being new info.

[Bronty]

So, I know there is interest in this material at a price higher than where it sold - someone simply got a bargain at my expense in this case.

So what you're saying, contrary to most people's opinion, is this is still a rather inefficient market?

 

I don't think the OA market is efficient, especially the further you get away from the mainstream. I'd be surprised if you found any serious argument to the contrary within the hobby.

My definition may be different than yours, probably should have expanded a bit. I consider an efficient market to be one where there's little/no room for arbitrage. Inefficient being the reverse. I'm sure there are examples of short term arbitrage, but overall I don't see obvious and regular opportunity. (In comparison to other sandboxes I play in.) But you may be right about other people, there's plenty of passion in this hobby but also a lot of speculation at prices outpacing inflation and opportunity cost in other sectors. So maybe I'm the only one that won't pay up for (imo) fully-priced artwork?

 

I'm right there with ya and it's why I mainly play elsewhere as well. It's tough to find obvious short term opportunities in this sandbox (although the trade off is it is comparatively liquid).