November 2015 Heritage Signature Auction Thread 1 1

[vodou]

I use the 25 years as a rule. Yes, I do know what the 20 year rule is. Why do I use 25 years? The prices of OA art really makes it a 25 or 30 year after the fact before your average guy is gonna plunk down the money to start collecting now a days. I read guys in here discussing purchases starting in the mid-5 figure range and moving up from there. Heck, the major discussion in this auction is about a $454,000 vs. a $ 154,000 cover. Most people can't afford nor will they ever be able to afford that type of hobby purchase in their lifetimes.

People around here talk about $200m Modigliani too, but that's just talkers. Almost nobody has that sort of stick to swing, $150k, $450k, $200m same difference. I wouldn't pay that much mind, the action in this hobby is mostly in the under $10k area. Tons of attractive vintage art out there $250-$500, those Bagleys a great example. Younger folks can afford that, using the twenty year parameter. However if we look at demographics of the growing mountain of student debt and lousy jobs situation for those in their twenties...you may have a point counting from twenty-five after all!

[suspense39]

What's a Ditko goblin gonna go for now?

 

LESS....

 

You'd know better than me, you're probably right. Personally I'd rather have a character drawn by the person that came up with the idea. Being this a mainly nostalgia based hobby, people collecting now probably feel a connection to Romita.

 

Using the 25 year rule you might wanna consider McFarlane as the connection.

Even McFarlane is done now, it's all about Bagley (whose work makes me lust nostalgically for the days of ..McFarlane...GAG). Somebody just dropped a crapton of interiors on Romitaman, and...well I guess it is what it is.

 

But the rule is the Twenty Year Rule, not twenty-five

 

Bagley and/or Todd. Depends on what you grew-up with. Romita, Kane, whomever. Each generation doesn't want the one that came before as they were never exposed to it or they got exposed to it through their fathers. In either case it makes that era a none starter for the next generation of collectors. Yes, there are examples of items outside of that generalization but for the most part it holds true.

 

I don't desire to own a Neal Adams page, a Romita page, whomever from that era. I wasn't exposed to them growing up. I don't have the "feel good" memories they bring. They are nice but not what I am interested in having in my collection. I don't have a friend my age that collects OA that is interested in adding them into their collections either. We are interested in the guys who came out of Image, and the era of independent books. The generation after ours is interested in the books they read growing up. While I do have some Finch, Mitch Genard and other newer artist pages I can't say they hold the appeal that a Lee and/or Liefeld page holds for me.

 

I use the 25 years as a rule. Yes, I do know what the 20 year rule is. Why do I use 25 years? The prices of OA art really makes it a 25 or 30 year after the fact before your average guy is gonna plunk down the money to start collecting now a days. I read guys in here discussing purchases starting in the mid-5 figure range and moving up from there. Heck, the major discussion in this auction is about a $454,000 vs. a $ 154,000 cover. Most people can't afford nor will they ever be able to afford that type of hobby purchase in their lifetimes. While I have a pretty nice collection it has been built during a time when OA art was cheaper. I could not rebuild my collection if I started today as it would be cost prohibitive to do so.

 

I totally get what your saying, but there must be some kind of other collector out there....look at the prices for high grade grade comics from the golden age, from my limited observation they continue to escalate, would comic art be that much different? It seems that stuff is before people's area of nostalgia. Dunno, I'm just thinking out loud on this board.

[bluechip]

What's a Ditko goblin gonna go for now?

 

LESS....

 

You'd know better than me, you're probably right. Personally I'd rather have a character drawn by the person that came up with the idea. Being this a mainly nostalgia based hobby, people collecting now probably feel a connection to Romita.

 

Using the 25 year rule you might wanna consider McFarlane as the connection.

Even McFarlane is done now, it's all about Bagley (whose work makes me lust nostalgically for the days of ..McFarlane...GAG). Somebody just dropped a crapton of interiors on Romitaman, and...well I guess it is what it is.

 

But the rule is the Twenty Year Rule, not twenty-five

 

Bagley and/or Todd. Depends on what you grew-up with. Romita, Kane, whomever. Each generation doesn't want the one that came before as they were never exposed to it or they got exposed to it through their fathers. In either case it makes that era a none starter for the next generation of collectors. Yes, there are examples of items outside of that generalization but for the most part it holds true.

 

I don't desire to own a Neal Adams page, a Romita page, whomever from that era. I wasn't exposed to them growing up. I don't have the "feel good" memories they bring. They are nice but not what I am interested in having in my collection. I don't have a friend my age that collects OA that is interested in adding them into their collections either. We are interested in the guys who came out of Image, and the era of independent books. The generation after ours is interested in the books they read growing up. While I do have some Finch, Mitch Genard and other newer artist pages I can't say they hold the appeal that a Lee and/or Liefeld page holds for me.

 

I use the 25 years as a rule. Yes, I do know what the 20 year rule is. Why do I use 25 years? The prices of OA art really makes it a 25 or 30 year after the fact before your average guy is gonna plunk down the money to start collecting now a days. I read guys in here discussing purchases starting in the mid-5 figure range and moving up from there. Heck, the major discussion in this auction is about a $454,000 vs. a $ 154,000 cover. Most people can't afford nor will they ever be able to afford that type of hobby purchase in their lifetimes. While I have a pretty nice collection it has been built during a time when OA art was cheaper. I could not rebuild my collection if I started today as it would be cost prohibitive to do so.

 

I totally get what your saying, but there must be some kind of other collector out there....look at the prices for high grade grade comics from the golden age, from my limited observation they continue to escalate, would comic art be that much different? It seems that stuff is before people's area of nostalgia. Dunno, I'm just thinking out loud on this board.

 

The 20 or 25 year rule gets misused by people who think too narrowly. It's supposed to be -- and it is -- the average span that it takes for something to JOIN the ranks of what is collectible. It is not about the time when everything 20 or 25 years old REPLACES everything that came before it.

 

That works only if you're talking about something which has faded away because it hasn't survived to remain relevant in any way decades later and nearly all those who remember it or ever heard about it are gone.

 

But it doesn't work when you are talking about characters that continue to be loved and sought after in a medium and a genre that continues to be relevant and whose original stories remain in print or get adapted in new stories.

 

Most of the people collecting golden age were not around to buy fresh new copies off the stand. And a whole lot of silver age collectors were not around to buy those books off the stand. But they saw those books and that art in reprints, or they've seen the covers reproduced and homaged and referenced countless times. Or they just like the new stuff and find it cool to seek out the old stuff just to see what it's like.

 

If you like ONLY the stuff that literally was published for the very first time in the days of your adolescence, great. More power to you. But to presume that stuff "before your time" will never be sought by any of your contemporaries (or the people who come after you) is to ignore mountains of evidence to the contrary.

 

I guarantee you that every person who has paid over a million for a Honus Wagner card was not around in 1909 when the card was published. But each of them, most likely, collected sports cards when they were a kid, and remembered hearing or reading that the Honus Wagner card was really valuable. So when they grew up and got rich, they decided to get one, based on the nostalgia they experienced hearing about it when they were young.

 

I just purchased a piece of art the other day that was from a time long, long before I grew up or was even born. And it evoked a time period in history that was also well before my experience. But, you know, I like the character, whom I discovered only decades later. And I have heard and read an awful lot about that time in history ever since I was a kid. So even though the piece originated well before my time, by an artist whose work I never once purchased fresh off the stand, the piece still held a nostalgia for me.

 

For most people, nostalgia doesn't happen based on when something was made, but when you first heard about it (or something like it)

 

 

Edited November 21, 2015 by bluechip

[suspense39]

Nicely put

[cloud cloddie]

Almost everything I currently collect, art and books, came out before I was born.

[bluechip]

Nicely put

thanks

[bluechip]

Almost everything I currently collect, art and books, came out before I was born.

 

Same here. Initially as a kid I just wanted the stuff I had been too young to buy directly. But I thought for things to be really valuable they should be older than me. Then I just began to appreciate the stuff that captured the spirit of my experience and went beyond it.

 

When I saw the art to Superman 17 I was impressed not because I had bought it off the stand; It was long before I was born I hadn't even seen the cover in any form until a year earlier. And not because I was a fan of Fred Rays (at the time I didn't even know his name and certainly couldn't have recognized his style). But I did see it and say "wow, that's Superman throttling Hitler!" Two names that are known in just about every household in the world and will continue to be known long after all of us are gone. All of that (and not personal nostalgia) made me think this would be a good item to have (though I was outbid by far). If I had first seen a repro of that cover when I was 12 at the same time I was learning all about world war 2, then it would've also had the whole childhood nostalgia thing, despite the fact it had existed long before I did.

Edited November 21, 2015 by bluechip

[Doc Joe]

The GL 76 cover and ASM 98 cover were both in my opinion and as such I did not bid on them.

 

I did however win this. And its awesome...

 

 

Did anyone else win any art other than the GL76 and ASM 98?

[Mephisto]

I think we are getting into pretty solid subjective territory here. I know a ton of guys that would echo almost the exact same sentiments but would substitute the GL76 cover for the ASM98. You have to admit Gene that you are a big Spidey guy and have huge nostalgia for that particular cover. And while I do like the ASM98 cover a lot (and appreciate why many love it), at the end of the day, for me, I see an upside-down/from-the-back shot of Spidey that is pretty standard Kane for the era. As such, for me as a huge Adams fan, it pales in comparison to the GL76 both artistically* AND in significance for both comic pop culture AND as it relates to the artist's canon of work.

 

*The fact that GL's left hand looks the face-hugger from Alien aside of course...

 

 

I think the composition on the ASM 98 is exceptional - much better than standard Kane for the era. The GL 76 cover is just way too sparse for my liking - it loses a ton in B&W vs. the published cover, whereas the Spidey cover is dripping with some of Giacoia's best inks. Hanging on a wall, the ASM cover would display a lot, lot better. Unless your audience is Albert Moy, Scott Williams, yourself and tth2.

 

I know you're an Adams guy, Mike, but, from a purely composition/content/aesthetic basis, this cover isn't even remotely close to his best. Wonky anatomy, way too much blank space...it's all about the significance of the book itself. If this was the cover to GL #77 and another cover had kicked off the run, the for this cover would be a lot, lot less than it is.

 

Gene's opinion holds little weight. He has admitted to having a soft spot for some Boris art...

[Lucky Baru]

What's a Ditko goblin gonna go for now?

 

LESS....

 

You'd know better than me, you're probably right. Personally I'd rather have a character drawn by the person that came up with the idea. Being this a mainly nostalgia based hobby, people collecting now probably feel a connection to Romita.

 

Using the 25 year rule you might wanna consider McFarlane as the connection.

Even McFarlane is done now, it's all about Bagley (whose work makes me lust nostalgically for the days of ..McFarlane...GAG). Somebody just dropped a crapton of interiors on Romitaman, and...well I guess it is what it is.

 

But the rule is the Twenty Year Rule, not twenty-five

 

Bagley and/or Todd. Depends on what you grew-up with. Romita, Kane, whomever. Each generation doesn't want the one that came before as they were never exposed to it or they got exposed to it through their fathers. In either case it makes that era a none starter for the next generation of collectors. Yes, there are examples of items outside of that generalization but for the most part it holds true.

 

I don't desire to own a Neal Adams page, a Romita page, whomever from that era. I wasn't exposed to them growing up. I don't have the "feel good" memories they bring. They are nice but not what I am interested in having in my collection. I don't have a friend my age that collects OA that is interested in adding them into their collections either. We are interested in the guys who came out of Image, and the era of independent books. The generation after ours is interested in the books they read growing up. While I do have some Finch, Mitch Genard and other newer artist pages I can't say they hold the appeal that a Lee and/or Liefeld page holds for me.

 

I use the 25 years as a rule. Yes, I do know what the 20 year rule is. Why do I use 25 years? The prices of OA art really makes it a 25 or 30 year after the fact before your average guy is gonna plunk down the money to start collecting now a days. I read guys in here discussing purchases starting in the mid-5 figure range and moving up from there. Heck, the major discussion in this auction is about a $454,000 vs. a $ 154,000 cover. Most people can't afford nor will they ever be able to afford that type of hobby purchase in their lifetimes. While I have a pretty nice collection it has been built during a time when OA art was cheaper. I could not rebuild my collection if I started today as it would be cost prohibitive to do so.

 

I totally get what your saying, but there must be some kind of other collector out there....look at the prices for high grade grade comics from the golden age, from my limited observation they continue to escalate, would comic art be that much different? It seems that stuff is before people's area of nostalgia. Dunno, I'm just thinking out loud on this board.

 

The 20 or 25 year rule gets misused by people who think too narrowly. It's supposed to be -- and it is -- the average span that it takes for something to JOIN the ranks of what is collectible. It is not about the time when everything 20 or 25 years old REPLACES everything that came before it.

 

That works only if you're talking about something which has faded away because it hasn't survived to remain relevant in any way decades later and nearly all those who remember it or ever heard about it are gone.

 

But it doesn't work when you are talking about characters that continue to be loved and sought after in a medium and a genre that continues to be relevant and whose original stories remain in print or get adapted in new stories.

 

Most of the people collecting golden age were not around to buy fresh new copies off the stand. And a whole lot of silver age collectors were not around to buy those books off the stand. But they saw those books and that art in reprints, or they've seen the covers reproduced and homaged and referenced countless times. Or they just like the new stuff and find it cool to seek out the old stuff just to see what it's like.

 

If you like ONLY the stuff that literally was published for the very first time in the days of your adolescence, great. More power to you. But to presume that stuff "before your time" will never be sought by any of your contemporaries (or the people who come after you) is to ignore mountains of evidence to the contrary.

 

I guarantee you that every person who has paid over a million for a Honus Wagner card was not around in 1909 when the card was published. But each of them, most likely, collected sports cards when they were a kid, and remembered hearing or reading that the Honus Wagner card was really valuable. So when they grew up and got rich, they decided to get one, based on the nostalgia they experienced hearing about it when they were young.

 

I just purchased a piece of art the other day that was from a time long, long before I grew up or was even born. And it evoked a time period in history that was also well before my experience. But, you know, I like the character, whom I discovered only decades later. And I have heard and read an awful lot about that time in history ever since I was a kid. So even though the piece originated well before my time, by an artist whose work I never once purchased fresh off the stand, the piece still held a nostalgia for me.

 

For most people, nostalgia doesn't happen based on when something was made, but when you first heard about it (or something like it)

 

 

Umm, if you read my post you will find that I stated their were exceptions to the generalization.

 

I am speaking from the collector car market which is another collector's niche market. Niche markets generally react the same.

 

Sure there are vehicles that continue to increase in value and outperform others. However, most of the generation that collected the vehicles of their youth that came before the current one see their values decrease as they leave the market. There isn't anyone that wants/desires those vehicles as they had been before and there suddenly is a glut of them on the market.

 

General overview/example I can offer is the pre-world war II collectible vehicles. The price rose form the 1970's through the late 1990's. As the collector pool aged and vehicles got snatched up the prices went up. However, when my grandparent's generation who fought WWII began to retire they began to sell their collections off. A glut in the market occurred and prices fell. On the whole they have not recovered.

 

Examples now occurring as the baby boomer's start to sell off their collections as they retire:

 

The 55-57 Thunderbird. Use to be a vehicle that had a solid core following and the prices went higher and higher. Then in 2006 they flat-lined in the 40K range. The generation that collected them and remembered them were selling them off and the interest wasn't there like it had been. You can still pick-up a very nicely restored 55-57 Thunderbird for around 40K and it is almost 2016. Another example, the same years as the Thunderbird Bel-Air. The value on them has remained constant and has slipped during that same period. In other words, since 2006 you can pick one up for 90-95K.

 

The OA market has and is expanding in price. However, the higher end pieces are owned by the baby boomer generation and they are at the point in life where they are looking to start cashing their collections out. It should be interesting to see where prices go as that occurs are a faster and faster rate as they age.

Edited November 21, 2015 by Lucky Baru

[cloud cloddie]

The GL 76 cover and ASM 98 cover were both in my opinion and as such I did not bid on them.

 

I did however win this. And its awesome...

 

 

Did anyone else win any art other than the GL76 and ASM 98?

I saw that in the lives and thought it was awesome. Way cooler than the two moon knights before it. Congrats

[Bronty]

Congrats Doc! Great piece

[Peter G]

What's a Ditko goblin gonna go for now?

 

LESS....

 

You'd know better than me, you're probably right. Personally I'd rather have a character drawn by the person that came up with the idea. Being this a mainly nostalgia based hobby, people collecting now probably feel a connection to Romita.

 

Using the 25 year rule you might wanna consider McFarlane as the connection.

Even McFarlane is done now, it's all about Bagley (whose work makes me lust nostalgically for the days of ..McFarlane...GAG). Somebody just dropped a crapton of interiors on Romitaman, and...well I guess it is what it is.

 

But the rule is the Twenty Year Rule, not twenty-five

 

Bagley and/or Todd. Depends on what you grew-up with. Romita, Kane, whomever. Each generation doesn't want the one that came before as they were never exposed to it or they got exposed to it through their fathers. In either case it makes that era a none starter for the next generation of collectors. Yes, there are examples of items outside of that generalization but for the most part it holds true.

 

I don't desire to own a Neal Adams page, a Romita page, whomever from that era. I wasn't exposed to them growing up. I don't have the "feel good" memories they bring. They are nice but not what I am interested in having in my collection. I don't have a friend my age that collects OA that is interested in adding them into their collections either. We are interested in the guys who came out of Image, and the era of independent books. The generation after ours is interested in the books they read growing up. While I do have some Finch, Mitch Genard and other newer artist pages I can't say they hold the appeal that a Lee and/or Liefeld page holds for me.

 

I use the 25 years as a rule. Yes, I do know what the 20 year rule is. Why do I use 25 years? The prices of OA art really makes it a 25 or 30 year after the fact before your average guy is gonna plunk down the money to start collecting now a days. I read guys in here discussing purchases starting in the mid-5 figure range and moving up from there. Heck, the major discussion in this auction is about a $454,000 vs. a $ 154,000 cover. Most people can't afford nor will they ever be able to afford that type of hobby purchase in their lifetimes. While I have a pretty nice collection it has been built during a time when OA art was cheaper. I could not rebuild my collection if I started today as it would be cost prohibitive to do so.

 

I totally get what your saying, but there must be some kind of other collector out there....look at the prices for high grade grade comics from the golden age, from my limited observation they continue to escalate, would comic art be that much different? It seems that stuff is before people's area of nostalgia. Dunno, I'm just thinking out loud on this board.

 

The 20 or 25 year rule gets misused by people who think too narrowly. It's supposed to be -- and it is -- the average span that it takes for something to JOIN the ranks of what is collectible. It is not about the time when everything 20 or 25 years old REPLACES everything that came before it.

 

That works only if you're talking about something which has faded away because it hasn't survived to remain relevant in any way decades later and nearly all those who remember it or ever heard about it are gone.

 

But it doesn't work when you are talking about characters that continue to be loved and sought after in a medium and a genre that continues to be relevant and whose original stories remain in print or get adapted in new stories.

 

Most of the people collecting golden age were not around to buy fresh new copies off the stand. And a whole lot of silver age collectors were not around to buy those books off the stand. But they saw those books and that art in reprints, or they've seen the covers reproduced and homaged and referenced countless times. Or they just like the new stuff and find it cool to seek out the old stuff just to see what it's like.

 

If you like ONLY the stuff that literally was published for the very first time in the days of your adolescence, great. More power to you. But to presume that stuff "before your time" will never be sought by any of your contemporaries (or the people who come after you) is to ignore mountains of evidence to the contrary.

 

I guarantee you that every person who has paid over a million for a Honus Wagner card was not around in 1909 when the card was published. But each of them, most likely, collected sports cards when they were a kid, and remembered hearing or reading that the Honus Wagner card was really valuable. So when they grew up and got rich, they decided to get one, based on the nostalgia they experienced hearing about it when they were young.

 

I just purchased a piece of art the other day that was from a time long, long before I grew up or was even born. And it evoked a time period in history that was also well before my experience. But, you know, I like the character, whom I discovered only decades later. And I have heard and read an awful lot about that time in history ever since I was a kid. So even though the piece originated well before my time, by an artist whose work I never once purchased fresh off the stand, the piece still held a nostalgia for me.

 

For most people, nostalgia doesn't happen based on when something was made, but when you first heard about it (or something like it)

 

 

Umm, if you read my post you will find that I stated their were exceptions to the generalization.

 

I am speaking from the collector car market which is another collector's niche market. Niche markets generally react the same.

 

Sure there are vehicles that continue to increase in value and outperform others. However, most of the generation that collected the vehicles of their youth that came before the current one see their values decrease as they leave the market. There isn't anyone that wants/desires those vehicles as they had been before and there suddenly is a glut of them on the market.

 

General overview/example I can offer is the pre-world war II collectible vehicles. The price rose form the 1970's through the late 1990's. As the collector pool aged and vehicles got snatched up the prices went up. However, when my grandparent's generation who fought WWII began to retire they began to sell their collections off. A glut in the market occurred and prices fell. On the whole they have not recovered.

 

Examples now occurring as the baby boomer's start to sell off their collections as they retire:

 

The 55-57 Thunderbird. Use to be a vehicle that had a solid core following and the prices went higher and higher. Then in 2006 they flat-lined in the 40K range. The generation that collected them and remembered them were selling them off and the interest wasn't there like it had been. You can still pick-up a very nicely restored 55-57 Thunderbird for around 40K and it is almost 2016. Another example, the same years as the Thunderbird Bel-Air. The value on them has remained constant and has slipped during that same period. In other words, since 2006 you can pick one up for 90-95K.

 

The OA market has and is expanding in price. However, the higher end pieces are owned by the baby boomer generation and they are at the point in life where they are looking to start cashing their collections out. It should be interesting to see where prices go as that occurs are a faster and faster rate as they age.

 

This super hero thing is just a fad.

 

In a few years, Batman, Spider-Man and Superman will be relegated to the forgotten dustbin of history.

 

This OA market is similar to what happened with beanie babies

[Bronty]

What's a Ditko goblin gonna go for now?

 

LESS....

 

You'd know better than me, you're probably right. Personally I'd rather have a character drawn by the person that came up with the idea. Being this a mainly nostalgia based hobby, people collecting now probably feel a connection to Romita.

 

Using the 25 year rule you might wanna consider McFarlane as the connection.

Even McFarlane is done now, it's all about Bagley (whose work makes me lust nostalgically for the days of ..McFarlane...GAG). Somebody just dropped a crapton of interiors on Romitaman, and...well I guess it is what it is.

 

But the rule is the Twenty Year Rule, not twenty-five

 

Bagley and/or Todd. Depends on what you grew-up with. Romita, Kane, whomever. Each generation doesn't want the one that came before as they were never exposed to it or they got exposed to it through their fathers. In either case it makes that era a none starter for the next generation of collectors. Yes, there are examples of items outside of that generalization but for the most part it holds true.

 

I don't desire to own a Neal Adams page, a Romita page, whomever from that era. I wasn't exposed to them growing up. I don't have the "feel good" memories they bring. They are nice but not what I am interested in having in my collection. I don't have a friend my age that collects OA that is interested in adding them into their collections either. We are interested in the guys who came out of Image, and the era of independent books. The generation after ours is interested in the books they read growing up. While I do have some Finch, Mitch Genard and other newer artist pages I can't say they hold the appeal that a Lee and/or Liefeld page holds for me.

 

I use the 25 years as a rule. Yes, I do know what the 20 year rule is. Why do I use 25 years? The prices of OA art really makes it a 25 or 30 year after the fact before your average guy is gonna plunk down the money to start collecting now a days. I read guys in here discussing purchases starting in the mid-5 figure range and moving up from there. Heck, the major discussion in this auction is about a $454,000 vs. a $ 154,000 cover. Most people can't afford nor will they ever be able to afford that type of hobby purchase in their lifetimes. While I have a pretty nice collection it has been built during a time when OA art was cheaper. I could not rebuild my collection if I started today as it would be cost prohibitive to do so.

 

I totally get what your saying, but there must be some kind of other collector out there....look at the prices for high grade grade comics from the golden age, from my limited observation they continue to escalate, would comic art be that much different? It seems that stuff is before people's area of nostalgia. Dunno, I'm just thinking out loud on this board.

 

The 20 or 25 year rule gets misused by people who think too narrowly. It's supposed to be -- and it is -- the average span that it takes for something to JOIN the ranks of what is collectible. It is not about the time when everything 20 or 25 years old REPLACES everything that came before it.

 

That works only if you're talking about something which has faded away because it hasn't survived to remain relevant in any way decades later and nearly all those who remember it or ever heard about it are gone.

 

But it doesn't work when you are talking about characters that continue to be loved and sought after in a medium and a genre that continues to be relevant and whose original stories remain in print or get adapted in new stories.

 

Most of the people collecting golden age were not around to buy fresh new copies off the stand. And a whole lot of silver age collectors were not around to buy those books off the stand. But they saw those books and that art in reprints, or they've seen the covers reproduced and homaged and referenced countless times. Or they just like the new stuff and find it cool to seek out the old stuff just to see what it's like.

 

If you like ONLY the stuff that literally was published for the very first time in the days of your adolescence, great. More power to you. But to presume that stuff "before your time" will never be sought by any of your contemporaries (or the people who come after you) is to ignore mountains of evidence to the contrary.

 

I guarantee you that every person who has paid over a million for a Honus Wagner card was not around in 1909 when the card was published. But each of them, most likely, collected sports cards when they were a kid, and remembered hearing or reading that the Honus Wagner card was really valuable. So when they grew up and got rich, they decided to get one, based on the nostalgia they experienced hearing about it when they were young.

 

I just purchased a piece of art the other day that was from a time long, long before I grew up or was even born. And it evoked a time period in history that was also well before my experience. But, you know, I like the character, whom I discovered only decades later. And I have heard and read an awful lot about that time in history ever since I was a kid. So even though the piece originated well before my time, by an artist whose work I never once purchased fresh off the stand, the piece still held a nostalgia for me.

 

For most people, nostalgia doesn't happen based on when something was made, but when you first heard about it (or something like it)

 

 

Umm, if you read my post you will find that I stated their were exceptions to the generalization.

 

I am speaking from the collector car market which is another collector's niche market. Niche markets generally react the same.

 

Sure there are vehicles that continue to increase in value and outperform others. However, most of the generation that collected the vehicles of their youth that came before the current one see their values decrease as they leave the market. There isn't anyone that wants/desires those vehicles as they had been before and there suddenly is a glut of them on the market.

 

General overview/example I can offer is the pre-world war II collectible vehicles. The price rose form the 1970's through the late 1990's. As the collector pool aged and vehicles got snatched up the prices went up. However, when my grandparent's generation who fought WWII began to retire they began to sell their collections off. A glut in the market occurred and prices fell. On the whole they have not recovered.

 

Examples now occurring as the baby boomer's start to sell off their collections as they retire:

 

The 55-57 Thunderbird. Use to be a vehicle that had a solid core following and the prices went higher and higher. Then in 2006 they flat-lined in the 40K range. The generation that collected them and remembered them were selling them off and the interest wasn't there like it had been. You can still pick-up a very nicely restored 55-57 Thunderbird for around 40K and it is almost 2016. Another example, the same years as the Thunderbird Bel-Air. The value on them has remained constant and has slipped during that same period. In other words, since 2006 you can pick one up for 90-95K.

 

The OA market has and is expanding in price. However, the higher end pieces are owned by the baby boomer generation and they are at the point in life where they are looking to start cashing their collections out. It should be interesting to see where prices go as that occurs are a faster and faster rate as they age.

 

Yes; we've had that discussion before and there's only three positions seemingly

 

1) due to the factors you name and or others, at the very least, the rate of price acceleration will slow down on the mature pieces (let's call that Bronze Age and back).

2) movies and such have turned on vast swaths of the public who will get in line to spend and prop up values

3) eminem and Oleg

 

Hard not to go with 1).

[Lucky Baru]

What's a Ditko goblin gonna go for now?

 

LESS....

 

You'd know better than me, you're probably right. Personally I'd rather have a character drawn by the person that came up with the idea. Being this a mainly nostalgia based hobby, people collecting now probably feel a connection to Romita.

 

Using the 25 year rule you might wanna consider McFarlane as the connection.

Even McFarlane is done now, it's all about Bagley (whose work makes me lust nostalgically for the days of ..McFarlane...GAG). Somebody just dropped a crapton of interiors on Romitaman, and...well I guess it is what it is.

 

But the rule is the Twenty Year Rule, not twenty-five

 

Bagley and/or Todd. Depends on what you grew-up with. Romita, Kane, whomever. Each generation doesn't want the one that came before as they were never exposed to it or they got exposed to it through their fathers. In either case it makes that era a none starter for the next generation of collectors. Yes, there are examples of items outside of that generalization but for the most part it holds true.

 

I don't desire to own a Neal Adams page, a Romita page, whomever from that era. I wasn't exposed to them growing up. I don't have the "feel good" memories they bring. They are nice but not what I am interested in having in my collection. I don't have a friend my age that collects OA that is interested in adding them into their collections either. We are interested in the guys who came out of Image, and the era of independent books. The generation after ours is interested in the books they read growing up. While I do have some Finch, Mitch Genard and other newer artist pages I can't say they hold the appeal that a Lee and/or Liefeld page holds for me.

 

I use the 25 years as a rule. Yes, I do know what the 20 year rule is. Why do I use 25 years? The prices of OA art really makes it a 25 or 30 year after the fact before your average guy is gonna plunk down the money to start collecting now a days. I read guys in here discussing purchases starting in the mid-5 figure range and moving up from there. Heck, the major discussion in this auction is about a $454,000 vs. a $ 154,000 cover. Most people can't afford nor will they ever be able to afford that type of hobby purchase in their lifetimes. While I have a pretty nice collection it has been built during a time when OA art was cheaper. I could not rebuild my collection if I started today as it would be cost prohibitive to do so.

 

I totally get what your saying, but there must be some kind of other collector out there....look at the prices for high grade grade comics from the golden age, from my limited observation they continue to escalate, would comic art be that much different? It seems that stuff is before people's area of nostalgia. Dunno, I'm just thinking out loud on this board.

 

The 20 or 25 year rule gets misused by people who think too narrowly. It's supposed to be -- and it is -- the average span that it takes for something to JOIN the ranks of what is collectible. It is not about the time when everything 20 or 25 years old REPLACES everything that came before it.

 

That works only if you're talking about something which has faded away because it hasn't survived to remain relevant in any way decades later and nearly all those who remember it or ever heard about it are gone.

 

But it doesn't work when you are talking about characters that continue to be loved and sought after in a medium and a genre that continues to be relevant and whose original stories remain in print or get adapted in new stories.

 

Most of the people collecting golden age were not around to buy fresh new copies off the stand. And a whole lot of silver age collectors were not around to buy those books off the stand. But they saw those books and that art in reprints, or they've seen the covers reproduced and homaged and referenced countless times. Or they just like the new stuff and find it cool to seek out the old stuff just to see what it's like.

 

If you like ONLY the stuff that literally was published for the very first time in the days of your adolescence, great. More power to you. But to presume that stuff "before your time" will never be sought by any of your contemporaries (or the people who come after you) is to ignore mountains of evidence to the contrary.

 

I guarantee you that every person who has paid over a million for a Honus Wagner card was not around in 1909 when the card was published. But each of them, most likely, collected sports cards when they were a kid, and remembered hearing or reading that the Honus Wagner card was really valuable. So when they grew up and got rich, they decided to get one, based on the nostalgia they experienced hearing about it when they were young.

 

I just purchased a piece of art the other day that was from a time long, long before I grew up or was even born. And it evoked a time period in history that was also well before my experience. But, you know, I like the character, whom I discovered only decades later. And I have heard and read an awful lot about that time in history ever since I was a kid. So even though the piece originated well before my time, by an artist whose work I never once purchased fresh off the stand, the piece still held a nostalgia for me.

 

For most people, nostalgia doesn't happen based on when something was made, but when you first heard about it (or something like it)

 

 

Umm, if you read my post you will find that I stated their were exceptions to the generalization.

 

I am speaking from the collector car market which is another collector's niche market. Niche markets generally react the same.

 

Sure there are vehicles that continue to increase in value and outperform others. However, most of the generation that collected the vehicles of their youth that came before the current one see their values decrease as they leave the market. There isn't anyone that wants/desires those vehicles as they had been before and there suddenly is a glut of them on the market.

 

General overview/example I can offer is the pre-world war II collectible vehicles. The price rose form the 1970's through the late 1990's. As the collector pool aged and vehicles got snatched up the prices went up. However, when my grandparent's generation who fought WWII began to retire they began to sell their collections off. A glut in the market occurred and prices fell. On the whole they have not recovered.

 

Examples now occurring as the baby boomer's start to sell off their collections as they retire:

 

The 55-57 Thunderbird. Use to be a vehicle that had a solid core following and the prices went higher and higher. Then in 2006 they flat-lined in the 40K range. The generation that collected them and remembered them were selling them off and the interest wasn't there like it had been. You can still pick-up a very nicely restored 55-57 Thunderbird for around 40K and it is almost 2016. Another example, the same years as the Thunderbird Bel-Air. The value on them has remained constant and has slipped during that same period. In other words, since 2006 you can pick one up for 90-95K.

 

The OA market has and is expanding in price. However, the higher end pieces are owned by the baby boomer generation and they are at the point in life where they are looking to start cashing their collections out. It should be interesting to see where prices go as that occurs are a faster and faster rate as they age.

 

This super hero thing is just a fad.

 

In a few years, Batman, Spider-Man and Superman will be relegated to the forgotten dustbin of history.

 

This OA market is similar to what happened with beanie babies

 

Sure, that was my point. Right-y-o

[Bronty]

^ To me 2) is based on the greatest misconception in the hobby - that movie and other media releases result in bringing in outsiders. The movies and such don't make other people spend more on these characters they make US spend more on them. It's us that are doing the spending anyway that allocate more to these suddenly hot characters because they are refreshed in our thoughts. That person buying that hot movie related comic or art? It's you, it's me, it's not John Q Public.

 

The movies do not bring people to comic collecting - they bring people to movie theatres and make us comic collectors pay more attention to the properties in question. So, to think there will be a new wave as a result if the movies... I don't see it. It would be a very faint echo to a very loud sound

[Lucky Baru]

^ To me 2) is based on the greatest misconception in the hobby - that movie and other media releases result in bringing in outsiders. The movies and such don't make other people spend more on these characters they make US spend more on them. It's us that are doing the spending anyway that allocate more to these suddenly hot characters because they are refreshed in our thoughts. That person buying that hot movie related comic or art? It's you, it's me, it's not John Q Public.

 

The movies do not bring people to comic collecting - they bring people to movie theatres and make us comic collectors pay more attention to the properties in question

 

Sure. Sounds alot like the fun times in the 1990's comic industry and then..........

 

 

THE BOTTOM FELL OUT

 

The memory of Omega Men #3 keeps me from buying the newest hottest book that keeps increasing in price.

Edited November 21, 2015 by Lucky Baru

[gambron]

I think we are getting into pretty solid subjective territory here. I know a ton of guys that would echo almost the exact same sentiments but would substitute the GL76 cover for the ASM98. You have to admit Gene that you are a big Spidey guy and have huge nostalgia for that particular cover. And while I do like the ASM98 cover a lot (and appreciate why many love it), at the end of the day, for me, I see an upside-down/from-the-back shot of Spidey that is pretty standard Kane for the era. As such, for me as a huge Adams fan, it pales in comparison to the GL76 both artistically* AND in significance for both comic pop culture AND as it relates to the artist's canon of work.

 

*The fact that GL's left hand looks the face-hugger from Alien aside of course...

 

 

I think the composition on the ASM 98 is exceptional - much better than standard Kane for the era. The GL 76 cover is just way too sparse for my liking - it loses a ton in B&W vs. the published cover, whereas the Spidey cover is dripping with some of Giacoia's best inks. Hanging on a wall, the ASM cover would display a lot, lot better. Unless your audience is Albert Moy, Scott Williams, yourself and tth2.

 

I know you're an Adams guy, Mike, but, from a purely composition/content/aesthetic basis, this cover isn't even remotely close to his best. Wonky anatomy, way too much blank space...it's all about the significance of the book itself. If this was the cover to GL #77 and another cover had kicked off the run, the for this cover would be a lot, lot less than it is.

 

Some random thoughts, now that I've been singled out as one of the crazy kool-aid drinking Adams fans that inoculates Gene from taking anything I have to say on this subject seriously...

 

 

I seriously love the GL76 cover. Love it artistically and for what it represents. The sparseness critique is, well, a little silly to me, but whatever. I think it's powerful and some of my favorite covers are VERY simple and sparse and in my opinion display very well. They have a quick read immediacy. I think of some of the Miller Daredevil covers in this same light, among many other examples. We'll have to agree to disagree on this.

 

Having said that, I have never thought this cover is Neal's absolute best cover job. And contrary to Mike's view, I don't even think it's hands down the best Adams GL cover. I argue that the GL 76, along with the cluster of 85, 86 and 87 are the best artistically (full disclosure--I own the 87). It's a "tie" IMO, for lack of a better description. Not gonna argue the merits of each here, and I don't expect others to agree with me in lockstep. Not only that, I've said a zillion times that the unpublished (and unfinished) GL76 cover is MUCH better than the published GL76. I've never heard why it was rejected by Neal or DC and would make an interesting conversation to have with Neal. Regardless, if the unpublished GL76 cover had been the published cover, it would be the best Adams GL cover alone and one of if not the best Adams cover period. Again, IMHO. But because the cover in question is the GL76 cover that was published, it's artistic, nostalgic and historic merits make this cover the Adams GL cover to own, which is reflected in the final hammer price.

 

And while there is no competition for me on owning and displaying either the GL76 cover or the Spidey 98 cover (I'd take the GL cover), I would definitely get a new and better logo made for the GL cover. You need the logo to complete the cover and give it balance and the current bright white one shown in this auction is god awful. Without the logo change, the Spidey 98 shows better, even with the glue stain (which I would also have professionally cleaned).

 

So yeah, I'd happily add either one of the these covers to my collection, but thought I'd bring some nuance to that position with this kool-aid induced post.

 

Scott

 

 

Mike and Gene, you know I love you both but for what it's worth (and i'm a huge Spidey guy)

 

the GL #76 is simply incredible to me. That run was all about "relevance" and challenging

 

the socio-economic/political norms of the day usually by way of angry Ollie slapping

 

around golden boy Hal. This dynamic runs through every single issue of that run. So

 

the cover with GA shooting the Arrow through GL's Lantern is quite simply the perfect

 

representation of that symbolically (and in this way an improvement over the original

 

unpublished version). Such a thoughtful composition and as it's purely symbolic and never

 

actually happens in the issue, it's one of the few pieces that sways towards contemporary

 

art as opposed to the garden-variety comic cover with a dramatic action scene inspired by one of the interior pages.

 

Just thought i'd chime in,

 

Ken

http://www.comicartfans.com/GalleryDetail.asp?GCat=19201

[vodou]

^ To me 2) is based on the greatest misconception in the hobby - that movie and other media releases result in bringing in outsiders. The movies and such don't make other people spend more on these characters they make US spend more on them. It's us that are doing the spending anyway that allocate more to these suddenly hot characters because they are refreshed in our thoughts. That person buying that hot movie related comic or art? It's you, it's me, it's not John Q Public.

 

The movies do not bring people to comic collecting - they bring people to movie theatres and make us comic collectors pay more attention to the properties in question. So, to think there will be a new wave as a result if the movies... I don't see it. It would be a very faint echo to a very loud sound

To be fair, can't we maybe argue that there is nostalgia being created there that will materialize in twenty to thirty years hence? I agree with Gene it is a bit of a leap to think this as the theater-goers aren't necessarily going to read more (any?) comics coming out of liking a movie, but...these things do not always follow pure linear logic anyway.

 

So if there's anything to that, then the cashout will more readily serve those in their twenties now, that would be in their fifties later...most of us older than that will be doddering or dead by then, so who cares, right?

[Bronty]

The inflection point is hard to judge I agree . Seems kind of a certainty it will happen in out lifetimes though