Next HA Auction ! 4 4

[Bronty]

I find it interesting to see the level of animosity towards the Kirby family here. I mean, as best I can determine following this thread, no.

 

You and your family couldn't do.

 

Again, I'm not looking for an argument - I'm just stating my surprise at the language being used when no one really even knows what is happening.

 

As best I can tell, all of this stems from gossip and one email from an auction house at the moment. Time will open this up and the facts will come out, then people can draw actual conclusions.

 

I think when there is more than enough there to have a discussion about. Those appear to be real emails, and real art pulled from the public eye. There's more than enough to start conversation.

 

Yes, true, I should have been more clear. I mean, this is a message board! I'm not sure why I used that term.

 

To try to correct myself - I think it's too early for the pitchforks and torches

 

gotcha

[otherworldsj33]

I find it interesting to see the level of animosity towards the Kirby family here. I mean, as best I can determine following this thread, no one here really seems very aware of the plan, or even if there is a plan.

 

If your own father or grandfather had been fleeced (as it is widely considered now a days - comics will break your heart, kid) by big business, you might look around and see what you could do to even the score. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just a little surprised at some of the adjectives being tossed around.

 

 

The family just got a s h i t load of money and now they want to go after original art that has been out there for at least 30 years (when some of the art was returned to Jack). They now have the money to throw at lawyers to lean on sellers and auction houses. I bet Marc Toberoff is behind this.

 

Again, I'm not saying it's right, I'm just saying. People seem to have come out throwing rocks, judging that the family has 'gotten enough' and should be done with it all. Who are we to say? This track doesn't look like one I'd personally go down were I in their shoes, but I also don't know the whole story or what their end aims are.

 

You and your family couldn't live on 40 or 50 million?

As much as comic art has escalated, I doubt there are very many people in our hobby who are worth even close to that. Even most of the more fortunate collectors have collections worth probably less then 5 million, way less in most cases.

Have some grace, and let it go. The time is past.

It smacks of a legal shake down and pure greed to almost all of us.

In this matter, it makes Adams look good, which is hard to do.

 

Again, I'm not looking for an argument - I'm just stating my surprise at the language being used when no one really even knows what is happening.

 

As best I can tell, all of this stems from gossip and one email from an auction house at the moment. Time will open this up and the facts will come out, then people can draw actual conclusions.

 

It's not gossip. What has been stated here on these boards is really happening.

[Bronty]

In this matter, it makes Adams look good, which is hard to do.

 

Yes!

 

I find the idea of the artists having a perpetual percentage of resale to be utterly offensive.

 

If your home builder wanted 10% of the price of the home every time it changed hands, what would you say to them?

 

Property rights belong to the owner period. If the artist wants to participate in his or her own market, simply keep your originals.

 

You can't have the money from selling them and participate in their future market too!

 

I'd be shocked if we could find a lot of people that thought this was a good idea.

 

Except for some artists who's art has increased in value alot since it was originally produced.

 

Sure, everybody wants an antacid for their sour grapes.

[otherworldsj33]

For the Kirby family the best positive spin I can think of to put on this is that the family took a vote and the greedy or weak minded members won narrowly over the more altruistic kin folk.

[vodou]

All they are doing is driving the art underground. They know that. How is that good for them or anyone else?

Pure speculation: artificial scarcity would very much raise the value (price realized) for any art that was auctioned "in the clear". Wanna guess who's got some o' dat?

 

Sidebar: How valuable the foresight that Jim Lee had to divest of his Kirby over the last several years? (Or does he yet have more held back?) And meanwhile Erik Larsen...still sitting on his hoard, right? Not that it was coming to market, but definitely not now.

[otherworldsj33]

All they are doing is driving the art underground. They know that. How is that good for them or anyone else?

Pure speculation: artificial scarcity would very much raise the value (price realized) for any art that was auctioned "in the clear". Wanna guess who's got some o' dat?

 

Sidebar: How valuable the foresight that Jim Lee had to divest of his Kirby over the last several years? (Or does he yet have more held back?) And meanwhile Erik Larsen...still sitting on his hoard, right? Not that it was coming to market, but definitely not now.

 

Who knows? It may get them some short term smallish gains, but in the big picture the loss of the goodwill of the community toward them will more then offset that.

Meanwhile does anyone truly believe that a underground market for his art won't further develop?

That absolutely all Kirby art is now stuck in place?

[Bronty]

All they are doing is driving the art underground. They know that. How is that good for them or anyone else?

Pure speculation: artificial scarcity would very much raise the value (price realized) for any art that was auctioned "in the clear". Wanna guess who's got some o' dat?

 

Sidebar: How valuable the foresight that Jim Lee had to divest of his Kirby over the last several years? (Or does he yet have more held back?) And meanwhile Erik Larsen...still sitting on his hoard, right? Not that it was coming to market, but definitely not now.

 

Who knows? It may get them some short term smallish gains, but in the big picture the loss of the goodwill of the community toward them will more then offset that.

Meanwhile does anyone truly believe that a underground market for his art won't further develop?

That absolutely all Kirby art is now stuck in place?

 

agreed especially re loss of goodwill

[vodou]

All they are doing is driving the art underground. They know that. How is that good for them or anyone else?

Pure speculation: artificial scarcity would very much raise the value (price realized) for any art that was auctioned "in the clear". Wanna guess who's got some o' dat?

 

Sidebar: How valuable the foresight that Jim Lee had to divest of his Kirby over the last several years? (Or does he yet have more held back?) And meanwhile Erik Larsen...still sitting on his hoard, right? Not that it was coming to market, but definitely not now.

 

Who knows? It may get them some short term smallish gains, but in the big picture the loss of the goodwill of the community toward them will more then offset that.

Meanwhile does anyone truly believe that a underground market for his art won't further develop?

That absolutely all Kirby art is now stuck in place?

 

agreed especially re loss of goodwill

Why would any Kirby aside from Jack and Roz care what The Hobby thinks of them? I mean some may, but in the abstract "why"?

[Bronty]

All they are doing is driving the art underground. They know that. How is that good for them or anyone else?

Pure speculation: artificial scarcity would very much raise the value (price realized) for any art that was auctioned "in the clear". Wanna guess who's got some o' dat?

 

Sidebar: How valuable the foresight that Jim Lee had to divest of his Kirby over the last several years? (Or does he yet have more held back?) And meanwhile Erik Larsen...still sitting on his hoard, right? Not that it was coming to market, but definitely not now.

 

Who knows? It may get them some short term smallish gains, but in the big picture the loss of the goodwill of the community toward them will more then offset that.

Meanwhile does anyone truly believe that a underground market for his art won't further develop?

That absolutely all Kirby art is now stuck in place?

 

agreed especially re loss of goodwill

Why would any Kirby aside from Jack and Roz care what The Hobby thinks of them? I mean some may, but in the abstract "why"?

 

I mean that people get turned off from bidding on kirby, which impacts the kirby market.

 

Example.

 

Say they got their apparent wish and receive 10% of all future sales.

 

As a buyer, I might just decide to collect someone else's work altogether... someone whose family is not going to extort me.

 

That might in aggregate reduce prices even more than the 10%. (It also might not, but someone like me who would like a nice kirby at some point but have lots of other interests... I'm not even going to bother if there is a "family tax" at purchase and resale. More importantly, collectors with deep pockets buying lots of kirby might suddenly decide they have enough kirby and don't need any more).

[otherworldsj33]

All they are doing is driving the art underground. They know that. How is that good for them or anyone else?

Pure speculation: artificial scarcity would very much raise the value (price realized) for any art that was auctioned "in the clear". Wanna guess who's got some o' dat?

 

Sidebar: How valuable the foresight that Jim Lee had to divest of his Kirby over the last several years? (Or does he yet have more held back?) And meanwhile Erik Larsen...still sitting on his hoard, right? Not that it was coming to market, but definitely not now.

 

Who knows? It may get them some short term smallish gains, but in the big picture the loss of the goodwill of the community toward them will more then offset that.

Meanwhile does anyone truly believe that a underground market for his art won't further develop?

That absolutely all Kirby art is now stuck in place?

 

agreed especially re loss of goodwill

Why would any Kirby aside from Jack and Roz care what The Hobby thinks of them? I mean some may, but in the abstract "why"?

 

Well if your all about money, you usually don't care what people think about you or your greedy nature, because, well, what the heck, who needs people, ya got money.

[Bronty]

All they are doing is driving the art underground. They know that. How is that good for them or anyone else?

Pure speculation: artificial scarcity would very much raise the value (price realized) for any art that was auctioned "in the clear". Wanna guess who's got some o' dat?

 

Sidebar: How valuable the foresight that Jim Lee had to divest of his Kirby over the last several years? (Or does he yet have more held back?) And meanwhile Erik Larsen...still sitting on his hoard, right? Not that it was coming to market, but definitely not now.

 

Who knows? It may get them some short term smallish gains, but in the big picture the loss of the goodwill of the community toward them will more then offset that.

Meanwhile does anyone truly believe that a underground market for his art won't further develop?

That absolutely all Kirby art is now stuck in place?

 

agreed especially re loss of goodwill

Why would any Kirby aside from Jack and Roz care what The Hobby thinks of them? I mean some may, but in the abstract "why"?

 

Maybe you're looking at it from the POV of 10% of anything is better than 10% of nothing, and if so, that's true.

 

However, although as you know I'm not a lawyer, I think part of what they've gotten so far has been little or nothing to do with the legal strength of their case and all to do with avoiding bad PR for disney and/or the slim chance of a shocking verdict.

 

So, they've had public love and PR on their side so far. This sure goes a long way to erasing all that. Perhaps your point would be that they no longer care since they've settled, but if so, eff them

 

That love for Jack that was a big part of what got them headlines and traction... can turn on them just as quick. Maybe they don't care if they already have their money, but his fame is a two edged sword. For all the reasons that his "fleecing" as some would call it drove headlines, their greed associated to his name will draw headlines too.

[otherworldsj33]

Exactly. Its not the legal issue here, but the human issue. It just feels inherently wrong, what they are doing.

In fact beyond the outcome of any potential legal case in this matter, and the general reasons why a court came to its decision, I don't care much about the legalities.

It's just not the way to go.

The spirit of the law and the letter of law are two very different issues from my perspective.

 

[Bronty]

Exactly. Its not the legal issue here, but the human issue. It just feels inherently wrong, what they are doing.

In fact beyond the outcome of any potential legal case in this matter, and the general reasons why a court came to its decision, I don't care much about the legalities.

It's just not the way to go.

The spirit of the law and the letter of law are two very different issues from my perspective.

 

The thing is Joe... there's really no conflict in this instance between the spirit of the law and my understanding of the letter of the law.

 

Either one would to my understanding tell them to take a short hike on a long pier and they are just trying to strong-arm their way into more money... is sure how it looks on the surface.

[otherworldsj33]

BTW, knowing the personalities of some of the dealers and maybe even a few of the big name auction houses out there, the Kirby family can expect to go to court over this. More bad press for your name, if anyone from or connected with the Kirby family is reading this, sounds like your lawyer is maybe going to make more money then you in this. Don't let him sell you on a bill of goods. Did you all get a second and even third legal opinion?

I would seriously think twice before going ahead with this if I was you. Your 1 and 0 now. Listen to the Beatles. Let it be.

[otherworldsj33]

Exactly. Its not the legal issue here, but the human issue. It just feels inherently wrong, what they are doing.

In fact beyond the outcome of any potential legal case in this matter, and the general reasons why a court came to its decision, I don't care much about the legalities.

It's just not the way to go.

The spirit of the law and the letter of law are two very different issues from my perspective.

 

The thing is Joe... there's really no conflict in this instance between the spirit of the law and my understanding of the letter of the law.

 

Either one would to my understanding tell them to take a short hike on a long pier and they are just trying to strong-arm their way into more money... is sure how it looks on the surface.

 

I agree.

 

[Brian Peck]

BTW, knowing the personalities of some of the dealers and maybe even a few of the big name auction houses out there, the Kirby family can expect to go to court over this. More bad press for your name, if anyone from or connected with the Kirby family is reading this, sounds like your lawyer is maybe going to make more money then you in this. Don't let him sell you on a bill of goods. Did you all get a second and even third legal opinion?

I would seriously think twice before going ahead with this if I was you. Your 1 and 0 now. Listen to the Beatles. Let it be.

 

They probably have the same lawyer, Marc Toberoff, from the Disney settlement. He has a history I trying to line his pockets.

In 2001, Toberoff set up a joint venture with the Shusters that would have entitled Pacific Pictures, a company of his, to half of their reclaimed Superman rights. And in 2002, he and Emanuel approached the Siegels with an offer to pay the family $15 million to license their Superman rights. Nothing came of his efforts. The Siegels didn’t want to part with Superman. And he dissolved the joint venture with the Shusters when he realized it wouldn’t hold up in court.

This comes from the legal case WB brought against Toberoff. So take alot of what the Kirby's say with a grain of salt since its probably coming thru Toberoff.

 

Edited December 30, 2016 by Brian Peck

[otherworldsj33]

Good info B.

[lobrac]

I also heard the Kirby family is suing the Colletta family for all the Kirby pencils Vince erased over time, which later negatively impacted art sales of Jack's pages from reaching their potential.

[vodou]

I also heard the Kirby family is suing the Colletta family for all the Kirby pencils Vince erased over time, which later negatively impacted art sales of Jack's pages from reaching their potential.

And Joe Sinnott is in turn suing the Kirbys for turning acquired taste into widely adored. Roughly 22x per issue.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Twanj]

I find it interesting to see the level of animosity towards the Kirby family here. I mean, as best I can determine following this thread, no one here really seems very aware of the plan, or even if there is a plan.

 

If your own father or grandfather had been fleeced (as it is widely considered now a days - comics will break your heart, kid) by big business, you might look around and see what you could do to even the score. I'm not saying it's right, I'm just a little surprised at some of the adjectives being tossed around.

 

Except that he wasn't fleeced by big business - he was paid fairly at the time, same as any of the rest of us, or any of the other marvel workers.

 

Marvel profited from Jack's creations, sure, and they paid not only him but hundreds of other people to keep that operation going and viable and fans engaged with it all. Each person associated with marvel's efforts from the office staff to the people churning out marvel cartoons in the 60s and 70s, to the marvel movies of the last 15 years, and all the comics and other projects in between have all contributed to the enduring fame and success of the characters in some way. Without all of those lunchboxes and cartoons, subsequent storylines, action figures, the movies never get made. Without the movies they aren't as big today. Its a giant snowball that a whole host of people have managed to push downhill for 50 years and its gotten bigger and bigger and bigger. Yes Jack smushed his hands around that first bit of snow and gave it its first big push down the hill but I think comics fans sometimes seem to give all the credit to the creator and none to the other people that made all the success and money possible. Without marvel being a well run ship, FF and spidey might go under after a relatively short run and what do you have then? Abandoned, mostly worthless IP.

 

So if Jack is entitled to anything beyond his paycheck then what about the cartoon makes, movie makers, the receptionist?? Why shouldn't their efforts towards success count for something. He was a paid contractor and he did his work well so he got lots more paid work as a reward.

 

That's really the end of the story, or would be if it weren't for how fantastically successful its all become at which point the amount paid no longer starts to look fair compared to the amount reaped. But at the time he did the work he was fairly paid, therefore, not fleeced! Lots of people have made lots of inventions while being paid by someone else that they didn't get rights to either.

 

As to adjectives, although I have made sure not to use any absolutes personally since I don't know the story, when you have people with a presumably 8 figure settlement and almost certainly no proof of what was or wasn't stolen, given away, sold etc., chasing after a piece of joe public's wallet (whether directly or through heritage, who would presumably pass on the charge), yeah joe public is not going to like it!

 

They may seem like the underdogs when suing disney, but with a big settlement in their back pocket, they are very much no longer the underdogs when hassling Joe Public. Fact is they really don't have any rights to hassle Disney either, but for Disney it was worth it to pay them to go away. Joe Public just wants them to go away!

 

 

 

this sums up my feelings except from what I've read Marvel didn't treat Kirby kindly, but that's business unfortunately. it wasn't a time of creator owned characters yet.

 

I wish the settlement had come while Kirby was living. I think it was morally right but not legally required.

 

this new art thing is just a shakedown. enough is enough.