ComicLink Spring Auction

[delekkerste]

50k to some is like $500 to others... I'm sure a lot of people on this board wouldn't blink an eye to spend $500 on a cool piece of art without considering future appreciation. It is all relative.

 

I look at financial matters differently. We can't ALL be oil sheiks now, can we ? There must be some objective measure of our actions. No ?

 

It's like I said - if enjoyment of the art (it's function as decor being displayed on the wall, the value of being able to admire a piece at any time, the value of getting nostalgic warm & fuzzies, pride of ownership, etc.) > expected price depreciation, then art can still be worth buying if you have the discretionary funds. Now, if I believed that expected price depreciation was 100%, then, no, it absolutely wouldn't make sense for me to spend as much as I do on art. My budget might not go down to zero either, but I would start treating art expenditures more like a consumable with no resale value and would spend a lot less.

 

But, since I don't believe this stuff is going to be worthless, I'm willing to keep buying within my range of price depreciation tolerance (and, to be sure, my tolerance is 100% on some pieces if I just like the idea of owning them, even if they are/will be worthless to anyone else). I've mentioned a few times that, while for insurance purposes I of course use some estimate of current FMV/replacement value, for my own personal records, I am far more conservative. I assume that every piece I buy is going to lose money in the long run and, for my personal balance sheet calculation, I mark every piece I buy down a minimum of 20% from cost (and, in the current frothy environment, most pieces are marked down by a third to a half or even more). It's very much like a bank making a risky loan and automatically recording both the loan and a hefty loan loss reserve on its books at the same time. As such, I carry the "book value" of my collection at only about 2/3rds of my cost basis - I feel that's a hard number which I can very likely recoup at a bare minimum even after transaction fees in a distressed sale scenario.

 

This accounting system also acts as a spending limitation mechanism for me - every time I buy a piece of art, my spreadsheet tells me that my personal net worth has declined. So, if I want to see that number go up (and I do want to see that number always going up), I should either not buy so much art, or I should monetize other art to effectively reverse that loss reserve and recognize a "gain".

[delekkerste]

If enjoyment of owning the art > expected price depreciation, then it's still worth it. If one is living hand-to-mouth and money concerns are always top of mind, then maybe one's enjoyment/pride of ownership is invariably going to be less than any financial hit taken. But, if comic art is what you love and you have the money, then sometimes you're willing to pay up for the privilege of ownership even if it's not your best financial/investment option.

 

And the transformation of Gene 1.0 to Gene 2.0 is complete!

 

I'm at least on Gene 3.0 by now, if not Gene 4.0!

[jjonahjameson1]

The two Williamson pieces seem to have done well.

[Peter G]

50k to some is like $500 to others... I'm sure a lot of people on this board wouldn't blink an eye to spend $500 on a cool piece of art without considering future appreciation. It is all relative.

 

I look at financial matters differently. We can't ALL be oil sheiks now, can we ? There must be some objective measure of our actions. No ?

 

It's like I said - if enjoyment of the art (it's function as decor being displayed on the wall, the value of being able to admire a piece at any time, the value of getting nostalgic warm & fuzzies, pride of ownership, etc.) > expected price depreciation, then art can still be worth buying if you have the discretionary funds. Now, if I believed that expected price depreciation was 100%, then, no, it absolutely wouldn't make sense for me to spend as much as I do on art. My budget might not go down to zero either, but I would start treating art expenditures more like a consumable with no resale value and would spend a lot less.

 

But, since I don't believe this stuff is going to be worthless, I'm willing to keep buying within my range of price depreciation tolerance. I've mentioned a few times that, while for insurance purposes I of course use some estimate of current FMV/replacement value, for my own personal records, I am far more conservative. I assume that every piece I buy is going to lose money in the long run and, for my personal balance sheet calculation, I mark every piece I buy down a minimum of 20% from cost (and, in the current frothy environment, most pieces are marked down by a third to a half or even more) - it's like a bank making a risky loan and automatically recording both the loan and a hefty loan loss reserve on their books at the same time. As such, I record the "book value" of my collection as only about 2/3rds of my cost basis - I feel that's a hard number which I can very likely recoup at a bare minimum even after transaction fees in a distressed sale scenario.

 

This accounting system also acts as a spending limitation mechanism for me - every time I buy a piece of art, my spreadsheet tells me that my personal net worth has declined. So, if I want to see that number go up (and I do want to see that number always going up), I should either not buy so much art, or I should monetize other art to effectively reverse that loss reserve and recognize a "gain".

 

That makes sense to me !

 

My point was more of that as an observation on the behavior of market participants and the questionable rationale in my minds eye to buy mostly based on nostalgia.

 

While initially intended as a response to vodous attempt to forecast future supply/demand of the OA market, my comment was trying to hilight the complexity of the OA market.

 

So many variables to consider - supply, demand, demographics, inflation, deflation, nostalgia, ROI, underlying economic conditions of the future economy as a whole as it effects Maslows Hierarchy of needs, etc, etc.

 

[Nexus]

If enjoyment of owning the art > expected price depreciation, then it's still worth it. If one is living hand-to-mouth and money concerns are always top of mind, then maybe one's enjoyment/pride of ownership is invariably going to be less than any financial hit taken. But, if comic art is what you love and you have the money, then sometimes you're willing to pay up for the privilege of ownership even if it's not your best financial/investment option.

 

And the transformation of Gene 1.0 to Gene 2.0 is complete!

 

I missed this.

 

If you're a newbie to the boards...

 

Gene 1.0 was rational, conservative, stayed in the margins (relatively speaking).

 

Gene 2.0 is a nut.

 

My kind of nut.

 

Ladies, you CAN change your man!

[JadeGiant]

If enjoyment of owning the art > expected price depreciation, then it's still worth it. If one is living hand-to-mouth and money concerns are always top of mind, then maybe one's enjoyment/pride of ownership is invariably going to be less than any financial hit taken. But, if comic art is what you love and you have the money, then sometimes you're willing to pay up for the privilege of ownership even if it's not your best financial/investment option.

 

And the transformation of Gene 1.0 to Gene 2.0 is complete!

 

I missed this.

 

If you're a newbie to the boards...

 

Gene 1.0 was rational, conservative, stayed in the margins (relatively speaking).

 

Gene 2.0 is a nut.

 

My kind of nut.

 

Ladies, you CAN change your man!

 

Relative newb and very much new in terms of spending level (these boards have introduced me to auction sites which I love and hate at the same time).

 

I get it ... I am inclined to be more like v1.0 but haven't made the jump to v2.0 ... let's call it v1.2

[Nexus]

It's like I said - if enjoyment of the art (it's function as decor being displayed on the wall, the value of being able to admire a piece at any time, the value of getting nostalgic warm & fuzzies, pride of ownership, etc.) > expected price depreciation, then art can still be worth buying if you have the discretionary funds. Now, if I believed that expected price depreciation was 100%, then, no, it absolutely wouldn't make sense for me to spend as much as I do on art. My budget might not go down to zero either, but I would start treating art expenditures more like a consumable with no resale value and would spend a lot less.

 

Most sketch/commission collectors understand this (or come to this realization soon enough) and operate similarly. Talking art with some of these guys, who are unburdened by $$$ concerns, is a nice change of pace. It's just about the art.

[comix4fun]

The two Williamson pieces seem to have done well.

 

 

You aren't kidding about that!

 

The Star Wars #50 page was sitting at $3500 and popped in a $4200 bid on it...ready to convince myself quickly to go to $5k...and BOOM it was $7200!.

[comix4fun]

It's like I said - if enjoyment of the art (it's function as decor being displayed on the wall, the value of being able to admire a piece at any time, the value of getting nostalgic warm & fuzzies, pride of ownership, etc.) > expected price depreciation, then art can still be worth buying if you have the discretionary funds. Now, if I believed that expected price depreciation was 100%, then, no, it absolutely wouldn't make sense for me to spend as much as I do on art. My budget might not go down to zero either, but I would start treating art expenditures more like a consumable with no resale value and would spend a lot less.

 

Most sketch/commission collectors understand this (or come to this realization soon enough) and operate similarly. Talking art with some of these guys, who are unburdened by $$$ concerns, is a nice change of pace. It's just about the art.

 

 

It's a great change of pace, especially if (as most of us seem to be) your profession is anything but creative and right brain stimulating.

 

The dollars spent commissioning, collaborating, creating, imagining commission pieces can be a great outlet....well worth the price....and far cheaper than professional therapy.

[delekkerste]

It's a great change of pace, especially if (as most of us seem to be) your profession is anything but creative and right brain stimulating.

 

The dollars spent commissioning, collaborating, creating, imagining commission pieces can be a great outlet....well worth the price....and far cheaper than professional therapy.

 

I need to commission myself some Objectivist art.

[vodou]

It's like I said - if enjoyment of the art (it's function as decor being displayed on the wall, the value of being able to admire a piece at any time, the value of getting nostalgic warm & fuzzies, pride of ownership, etc.) > expected price depreciation, then art can still be worth buying if you have the discretionary funds. Now, if I believed that expected price depreciation was 100%, then, no, it absolutely wouldn't make sense for me to spend as much as I do on art. My budget might not go down to zero either, but I would start treating art expenditures more like a consumable with no resale value and would spend a lot less.

 

Most sketch/commission collectors understand this (or come to this realization soon enough) and operate similarly. Talking art with some of these guys, who are unburdened by $$$ concerns, is a nice change of pace. It's just about the art.

Felix I get you, but man it's tough (for most of us) to not have $$$ concerns when cover quality is generally four figures for anything more than one person wants

 

However, I will mention that I'm pretty happy to have scored a nearly twenty year old Grummett Superman cover for $550 last weekend. Maybe I got a real sleeper deal or everybody else passed as it's pure sht (I do not know -I'm not even a Superman fan!), but I think it's fun art and it's very much not about the $$$, this one. To me.

 

But not to alienate the $$$ lovers out there. It had sold publicly before and here's the ROI breakdown:

 

Return on Investment Calculator

 

Original Investment ($) 236

Investment Start Date (mm/dd/yyyy) 3/2/2003

 

Returned Value ($) 495 ($550 less assumed 10% seller's commission)

Investment End Date (mm/dd/yyyy) 5/22/2016

 

Gain or Loss on Investment ($) 259

Investment Term (Years) 13.2

Return on Investment (%) 8.3%

Simple Annualized ROI (%)

 

Scoring a mainstream DC cover, and an attractive one (imo), edging into 25 yr vintage 'hot zone', for $550...happy to pay the other guy 8.3% annually to hold it for me since 2003 . Let's hope he's putting the proceeds back into the hobby in a way that makes him happy too!

[vodou]

Whoops! s/b:

 

Return on Investment (%) 109.7%

Simple Annualized ROI (%) 8.3%

[comiconxion]

I'm surprised no one commented on the $1550 for the Vosburg G.I. Joe #15 panel page. Although we've seen Joe splashes and pinups go for a lot lately, I think that's a record for a Vosburg panel page. I guess it's the Snake Eyes factor and the fact that very few pages show up from those first 30 issues.

 

[comix4fun]

It's a great change of pace, especially if (as most of us seem to be) your profession is anything but creative and right brain stimulating.

 

The dollars spent commissioning, collaborating, creating, imagining commission pieces can be a great outlet....well worth the price....and far cheaper than professional therapy.

 

I need to commission myself some Objectivist art.

 

Synergy!!!

 

 

[Doc McCoy]

It's a great change of pace, especially if (as most of us seem to be) your profession is anything but creative and right brain stimulating.

 

The dollars spent commissioning, collaborating, creating, imagining commission pieces can be a great outlet....well worth the price....and far cheaper than professional therapy.

 

I need to commission myself some Objectivist art.

 

 

 

 

CHRIS

 

GENE

[JadeGiant]

Deodato Jr. pages seem to be holding or increasing. Maybe that generation of collectors is starting to purchase his pages. I thought that the ELEKTRA #11 PAGE 18, Mike Deodato, Jr. page was a strong DD page.

 

I have been buying Mike's Hulk pages under what I think they are worth for years. They don't all go cheap but enough do that allows me to keep adding them to my collection. I think he is a very well known name and an appreciated artist - just don't think sale prices always reflect this (I only follow his Hulk stuff).

[JadeGiant]

It's like I said - if enjoyment of the art (it's function as decor being displayed on the wall, the value of being able to admire a piece at any time, the value of getting nostalgic warm & fuzzies, pride of ownership, etc.) > expected price depreciation, then art can still be worth buying if you have the discretionary funds. Now, if I believed that expected price depreciation was 100%, then, no, it absolutely wouldn't make sense for me to spend as much as I do on art. My budget might not go down to zero either, but I would start treating art expenditures more like a consumable with no resale value and would spend a lot less.

 

Most sketch/commission collectors understand this (or come to this realization soon enough) and operate similarly. Talking art with some of these guys, who are unburdened by $$$ concerns, is a nice change of pace. It's just about the art.

 

Absolutely! It's what keeps me going in this hobby

[BCarter27]

If I could draw... I would summarize this thread as the Buy-What-You-Love-Man holding off a horde of the evil ROI. Picturing marching faceless shadow creatures... with pie charts.

[eewwnuk]

$550 for a published grummet superman cover sounds like a steal!

[JadeGiant]

It's like I said - if enjoyment of the art (it's function as decor being displayed on the wall, the value of being able to admire a piece at any time, the value of getting nostalgic warm & fuzzies, pride of ownership, etc.) > expected price depreciation, then art can still be worth buying if you have the discretionary funds. Now, if I believed that expected price depreciation was 100%, then, no, it absolutely wouldn't make sense for me to spend as much as I do on art. My budget might not go down to zero either, but I would start treating art expenditures more like a consumable with no resale value and would spend a lot less.

 

Most sketch/commission collectors understand this (or come to this realization soon enough) and operate similarly. Talking art with some of these guys, who are unburdened by $$$ concerns, is a nice change of pace. It's just about the art.

 

 

It's a great change of pace, especially if (as most of us seem to be) your profession is anything but creative and right brain stimulating.

 

The dollars spent commissioning, collaborating, creating, imagining commission pieces can be a great outlet....well worth the price....and far cheaper than professional therapy.

 

I couldn't agree more. For me, I find great personal value in the nostalgia that a page from my youth brings. But I also find equal (and different) value from those really great commission experiences. I find great enjoyment to come up with ideas/themes/concepts and then seeing an artist latch on and deliver something that resonates with me (and often with the artist). The personal value equation is the same even if the financial value is not (and it isn’t). I have met many great fellow collectors in the commissioning hobby and the their enthusiasm can be contagious (and often brings me back when I am trying to move toward published stuff). I love the therapy comment and I consider cons with fellow collectors as just that.