POLL: Which is worth more, the Mile High Action #1 or the Action #1 Cover OA?

[N e r V]

 

 

What is the highest cash offer known and verified (not anything the "dentist" has claimed) for the Mile High copy?

 

I seem to remember the number of 5 million being thrown around at sometime but not sure if that was a real cash offer or just a rumor.

[Bronty]

whether known or not, offers are worth nothing until they become sales. That's true of any MH a1 offers and that's true of the 450k offer for richard's art, lovely as it is, and as well worth that figure as it is in my eyes.

[bluechip]

Forgotten in this discussion so far is that we know there is at least some art from Action 1 still existing. Three panels of newspaper art which were then repurposed for the book. Very iconic images, etc. Sold in the early 90s

[jimjum12]

I see Gene's arguments very clearly..... and they aren't really arguments per se, but more observations and concerns. While I voted for the art in the POLL, that vote does not reflect MY position. Since this is about our feelings and opinions, I'm going to go on and say it outloud, the cover to Action Comics 1 is lousy. The story inside is original and compelling, but the art inside is also lousy. I think when we begin to bandy about with the 8 figure estimates, we must also consider what else is available at that level..... because not everyone buys art from an investment standpoint, if, indeed the AC 1 cover would even suit that purpose at that level. At some point a large segment of the pool will be swayed by aesthetics. Certainly, the historical significance cannot be understated.... I believe the piece would belong in the Smithsonian. For me, I'd have to be flush with at least a half billion to even consider wanting it at 10M..... give me the art to Superman 14 any day....... or even more so, the art to AF 15, FF 1, or BB 28 GOD BLESS....

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[delekkerste]

It's kind of weird that I am actually starting to agree with Gene's points in this discussion.

 

What's even weirder as that I am actually on the same side of an argument as both you and Andy. :whatthe:

 

 

But since this is a hypothetical question then hypothetically shouldn't the art be worth more? I'm not being snarky. The poll is telling us exactly that. As a collector of comic books intellectually it makes sense that the art would be more valuable than the published version. Most collectors would instantly say that, yes, the art is worth significantly more. Gene, I am curious if you would also feel that the art should be worth more, even you do not think it would sell for more? So if, in reality, the comic would sell for more does that say something about the market as a whole?

 

I don't know, actually. On the one hand, I'm an art guy and, like yourself, instinctively and intellectually, my inclination is to say that the art should be worth more. On the other hand, the cover art alone is just a slice of Superman's first appearance whereas the book has his full appearance in the size, shape, colors, and smell that all of us remember, and is regarded as the singular peak of the pyramid in a much larger hobby. And, unlike a lot of art guys, I'm not as swayed by the whole "one of a kind" argument, since some of the most desirable objects in the world are not one of a kind (e.g., a Ferrari 250 GTO). And, like the Ferrari, it's Action #1 the comic book that people have dreamed about all their lives. Not the original cover art. Not the blueprints to the car or the mock-up full-scale model they had in the Ferrari factory. The finished article in its fully realized form.

 

And, being an art guy, if peoples' senses were offended that the top two highest public sales of American OA are a Herb Trimpe page and a Todd McFarlane cover, what does it say if the most valuable item in either the comic book or comic art hobbies isn't by Will Eisner or Wally Wood or Frank Frazetta (comic work only) or Alex Raymond or Alex Schomburg or Al Williamson or Jack Kirby or Steve Ditko or John Romita or Neal Adams or John Byrne or Frank Miller but rather by someone whose identity isn't even known for sure (I guess there's some doubt where Shuster drew it)? And never mind the fact that the drawing isn't exactly the peak realization of the medium. :doh: I guess that's neither here nor there, but if people want OA to be taken more seriously as just plain "art" instead of "comic art", seeing something like this at the top of the food chain, where any artistic qualities take a complete backseat to the history, rarity, collectibility, importance and value of the published comic...well, I'm not sure this is the right piece to represent. Again, that may not have any bearing on whether the value is there or not, but just adding my to the mix.

 

So, I agree that, at the moment, I don't think the cover art would be more valuable than the MH copy. As to whether it should be, or if it can/will get there over time, after reading all the opinions and arguments here, I can see both sides of the argument and could go either way on that.

[MrBedrock]

I would never consider myself an art collector. I have some art and there are definitely some others that I would love to have, but for the most part original comic art leaves me cold. I have always looked at comic art from a display standpoint. If it displays well and makes an impression on me then I can see the value in it. If it is simply a black and white representation of something printed in full color I am not really moved. But I would think there really would not be any piece of comic art that would display as dramatically as an Action 1 cover. I've seen most of the high end examples cited it this thread. Some of them are insanely cool. It is hard to imagine a better crafted cover than the WSF 29. But the idea of staring at the original cover art for Action 1...I would probably start crying. There really isn't another piece of comic art that, if displayed, would have that kind of impact, regardless of artistic merit. In any potential gallery display of comic art I would think that piece would undoubtedly be the focal point and would stir the most conversation. You and I would walk that gallery and comment of the Millers, the Fines, the Eisners, the Kurtzmans. We would discuss the linework on the Kirbys, the Woods, the Bakers. But when we came to the Action 1 cover we wouldn't say a thing, we would just stare at it in wonder. For that very simple reasons I would place more value on it than any other piece of comic art.

[Bronty]

^ just goes to what I was saying about the person that buys that cover, if for big money, probably being more comic collector than art collector.

 

The question about whether this goes for 7m to me really boils down to would the comic collectors pay 7m for it. The art collectors won't, at least for now.

[ciorac]

I would never consider myself an art collector. I have some art and there are definitely some others that I would love to have, but for the most part original comic art leaves me cold. I have always looked at comic art from a display standpoint. If it displays well and makes an impression on me then I can see the value in it. If it is simply a black and white representation of something printed in full color I am not really moved. But I would think there really would not be any piece of comic art that would display as dramatically as an Action 1 cover. I've seen most of the high end examples cited it this thread. Some of them are insanely cool. It is hard to imagine a better crafted cover than the WSF 29. But the idea of staring at the original cover art for Action 1...I would probably start crying. There really isn't another piece of comic art that, if displayed, would have that kind of impact, regardless of artistic merit. In any potential gallery display of comic art I would think that piece would undoubtedly be the focal point and would stir the most conversation. You and I would walk that gallery and comment of the Millers, the Fines, the Eisners, the Kurtzmans. We would discuss the linework on the Kirbys, the Woods, the Bakers. But when we came to the Action 1 cover we wouldn't say a thing, we would just stare at it in wonder. For that very simple reasons I would place more value on it than any other piece of comic art.

 

Precisely.

 

I wept just reading this

[VintageComics]

A lot of it is going to be marketing. Art does have some relationship in price to the printed comic.

 

If an auction house were to assert to legitimate bidders what the best Action #1 would be worth (theoretically of course) the the relationship would also lower the barrier for the art.

 

What comparable pieces to Action #1 have ever sold?

[Moondog]

I think the art would win. It is so iconic a cover and so heavily associated with pop culture that it would attract the deep pocketed fine art buyers who don't care or collect comics at all. I suspect this pool of buyers would leave the strict collectors of comic OA in the dust

 

[Bronty]

A lot of it is going to be marketing. Art does have some relationship in price to the printed comic.

 

What comparable pieces to Action #1 have ever sold?

 

There's little to no causal relationship. There is a correlation, for sure, in that memorable or collectible books spur demand for both the art and the printed book, but the price of the printed book has a lot to do with the supply, which kills any attempt to view it as a causal relationship.

 

We're all sick of spidey 328 as a data point, but it was an extreme example of how the price of the printed comic (maybe five bucks in this case?) has little to do with the price of the art.

 

Ehh. I'm sure you know all that. We're beating a dead horse. I can't help but notice how all the guys picking the art though are mostly printed comic guys and not art collectors.

 

Seems like each "side" thinks the other side would win.

[Aman619]

Each year the cover image becomes more iconic and more and more people recognize what it is. As I stated earlier if it's not a mess in person, i think it transcends all other comic covers, and while the art is kinda lousy as "art" as pointed out earlier, (same as 99% of ALL comic art) what it represents, a debate it started, that makes it more valuable than even the best copy.

 

And, as for the Best Copy side of this discussion, does anyone also think that this argument changes if the MH is a 9.2 (only one step better than the second bests) or a 9.4 ( clearly better by a margin) or a 9.6 ("way" more better than the 9.0s.and all other copies)??

[Aman619]

A lot of it is going to be marketing. Art does have some relationship in price to the printed comic.

 

What comparable pieces to Action #1 have ever sold?

 

There's little to no causal relationship. There is a correlation, for sure, in that memorable or collectible books spur demand for both the art and the printed book, but the price of the printed book has a lot to do with the supply, which kills any attempt to view it as a causal relationship.

 

We're all sick of spidey 328 as a data point, but it was an extreme example of how the price of the printed comic (maybe five bucks in this case?) has little to do with the price of the art.

 

Ehh. I'm sure you know all that. We're beating a dead horse. I can't help but notice how all the guys picking the art though are mostly printed comic guys and not art collectors.

 

Seems like each "side" thinks the other side would win.

 

Yes. Interesting, wot?

[Sqeggs]

I would never consider myself an art collector. I have some art and there are definitely some others that I would love to have, but for the most part original comic art leaves me cold. I have always looked at comic art from a display standpoint. If it displays well and makes an impression on me then I can see the value in it. If it is simply a black and white representation of something printed in full color I am not really moved. But I would think there really would not be any piece of comic art that would display as dramatically as an Action 1 cover. I've seen most of the high end examples cited it this thread. Some of them are insanely cool. It is hard to imagine a better crafted cover than the WSF 29. But the idea of staring at the original cover art for Action 1...I would probably start crying. There really isn't another piece of comic art that, if displayed, would have that kind of impact, regardless of artistic merit. In any potential gallery display of comic art I would think that piece would undoubtedly be the focal point and would stir the most conversation. You and I would walk that gallery and comment of the Millers, the Fines, the Eisners, the Kurtzmans. We would discuss the linework on the Kirbys, the Woods, the Bakers. But when we came to the Action 1 cover we wouldn't say a thing, we would just stare at it in wonder. For that very simple reasons I would place more value on it than any other piece of comic art.

 

Precisely.

 

I wept just reading this

 

Me, too. It was tragic, yet heartwarming. Kind of like A Christmas Carol, with Mr. B as Tiny Tim and delekkerste as Scrooge.

[october]

What's even weirder as that I am actually on the same side of an argument as both you and Andy. :whatthe:

 

 

[Bronty]

@Richard, Bill

 

I can't believe we are talking about weeping over comic covers

 

I love you guys and all, but can you guys get some Summer's Eve and call it good?

[comicdonna]

I would never consider myself an art collector. I have some art and there are definitely some others that I would love to have, but for the most part original comic art leaves me cold. I have always looked at comic art from a display standpoint. If it displays well and makes an impression on me then I can see the value in it. If it is simply a black and white representation of something printed in full color I am not really moved. But I would think there really would not be any piece of comic art that would display as dramatically as an Action 1 cover. I've seen most of the high end examples cited it this thread. Some of them are insanely cool. It is hard to imagine a better crafted cover than the WSF 29. But the idea of staring at the original cover art for Action 1...I would probably start crying. There really isn't another piece of comic art that, if displayed, would have that kind of impact, regardless of artistic merit. In any potential gallery display of comic art I would think that piece would undoubtedly be the focal point and would stir the most conversation. You and I would walk that gallery and comment of the Millers, the Fines, the Eisners, the Kurtzmans. We would discuss the linework on the Kirbys, the Woods, the Bakers. But when we came to the Action 1 cover we wouldn't say a thing, we would just stare at it in wonder. For that very simple reasons I would place more value on it than any other piece of comic art.

 

Precisely.

 

I wept just reading this

 

Me, too. It was tragic, yet heartwarming. Kind of like A Christmas Carol, with Mr. B as Tiny Tim and delekkerste as Scrooge.

[Bronty]

[jerome34]

On second thought (my first, and vote, were for the art):

Suppose the two items came up at the same time: I suspect

the comic would beat the art.

Suppose they both came up again in 3 years; I suspect the

two would have similar prices.

Suppose they both came up again in another three years; I

suspect the art would beat the comic and from then on

the art would always beat the comic.

 

The first one or two sales of the art would build the background

"base price" for art high enough that it would make high prices

for original art seem understandable.

 

Note that were this happen, the sale of the original art to

the cover of any highly regarded comic would almost always

beat the best copy of the comic since the "base price" for

original art would allow high prices to be understandable.

 

[VintageComics]

But are there any comparables to Action #1 in the OA world?

 

The only one I can think of is Action #15 so far.