The Official Feb 22-24 Heritage Auction Thread 4 4

[Rick2you2]

3 hours ago, Skizz said:

Somebody here recently suggested a simple yet excellent way to set ones expectations before an auction - check what things similar went for recently and add 20% to it and decide if you can manage that. 

The problem with that approach is that you can lose to someone who hit the 20% mark first, and you could win at 21%. 

I think you should just go with what you can manage, based on how much you like the piece. 

[PhilipB2k17]

On 2/7/2018 at 11:29 AM, delekkerste said:

Not saying they were equivalent.    In fact, this may be a good chance for someone to get a nice Stevens cover at FMV instead of paying a huge scarcity premium.  

That said, I know a fair bit about the history of this piece, both past and present.  I am confident that this one is going to end multiples higher.  If $20K is getting out of reach for anyone, they'd be better off just scratching it off their list right now. 

What would you rather own? The Stephens Vampirella cover? Or the Carl Barks duck painting? I’m speaking to everyone here, not just Gene specifically because I know he’s a big Vampirella art, and Stephens fan, so that cover probably hits his Collector sweet spot. 

Edited February 10, 2018 by PhilipB2k17

[Panelfan1]

2 hours ago, Rick2you2 said:

The problem with that approach is that you can lose to someone who hit the 20% mark first, and you could win at 21%. 

I think you should just go with what you can manage, based on how much you like the piece. 

What I had said was 25-50% more . But not to have to spend rather than to be prepared to spend.  

That is - when people say "I hope to win" you need to give yourself a chance - to do that you need to be prepared to spend more than the previous close. You might not have to - and I wouldnt suggest placing the bid in advance and leaving it. 

The percentage 25-50% is not a set # and will depend on your budget (hard cap) and the value of the piece (ex: $200 vs $20,000). 

So the 20% vs 21% is not an issue as you need to set your expectations to a range. Not a specific amount.

 

[PhilipB2k17]

3 minutes ago, Panelfan1 said:

What I had said was 25-50% more . But not to have to spend rather than to be prepared to spend.  

That is - when people say "I hope to win" you need to give yourself a chance - to do that you need to be prepared to spend more than the previous close. You might not have to - and I wouldnt suggest placing the bid in advance and leaving it. 

The percentage 25-50% is not a set # and will depend on your budget (hard cap) and the value of the piece (ex: $200 vs $20,000). 

So the 20% vs 21% is not an issue as you need to set your expectations to a range. Not a specific amount.

 

The thing about auctions is that once you’ve bid up to your max on an item, it’s very easy to break through the psychological barrier and bid ~just~ a bit more to get it. 

 

[Panelfan1]

9 hours ago, Matches_Malone said:

Is called wishful thinking 

Its actually called anchoring. Just couldnt think of the term when doing the last post. Its a real phenominon in many areas of life where money is involved.  

If I had to explain it in cartoons terminology - its like all those old cartoons where an egg would hatch and then the young bird would call whatever creature it saw first 'mama'.   It made for laughs - but when it happens to us and spending its not as funny.

[Panelfan1]

3 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

The thing about auctions is that once you’ve bid up to your max on an item, it’s very easy to break through the psychological barrier and bid ~just~ a bit more to get it. 

 

You are correct. But again consider the context of my comment - it was for a person who said 'i hope to win' and the response of another member was 'people who hope to win usually dont'.  So I gave a suggested strategy - since aperson who hopes to win that doesnt may not - because the expectaions were that it had to happen at a lower price.

[tth2]

I don't know any knowledgeable collectors who think like this.  They know that the last bid before live bidding means absolutely nothing. 

They and other knowledgeable collectors will have a value in their head and that's the only thing that matters. 

[comix4fun]

39 minutes ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

What would you rather own? The Stephens Vampirella cover? Or the Carl Barks duck painting? I’m speaking to everyone here, not just Gene specifically because I know he’s a big Vampirella art, and Stephens fan, so that cover probably hits his Collector sweet spot. 

If it's a Stevens... then I would take it 100 out of 100 times. 

The Barks Duck Painting Market is what I liked to call....extraordinarily "mature", not older..."better" (ahem)....and the few insane ebay asking prices and message board shills to the contrary I think we've seen the golden age of Bark's painting valuation/demand come and go....

Edited February 10, 2018 by comix4fun

[vodou]

31 minutes ago, comix4fun said:

If it's a Stevens... then I would take it 100 out of 100 times. 

The Barks Duck Painting Market is what I liked to call....extraordinarily "mature", not older..."better" (ahem)....and the few insane ebay asking prices and message board shills to the contrary I think we've seen the golden age of Bark's painting valuation/demand come and go....

Yeah. Preach it. 5-7k per is fmv w/o the hype and stickiness of prices paid by white hairs and their friends. People will die with these. And then their heirs will liquidate for pennies on the dollar. Seen it so many times before. I'll be there to catch one, hopefully. But if not...all good

[comix4fun]

1 hour ago, vodou said:

Yeah. Preach it. 5-7k per is fmv w/o the hype and stickiness of prices paid by white hairs and their friends. People will die with these. And then their heirs will liquidate for pennies on the dollar. Seen it so many times before. I'll be there to catch one, hopefully. But if not...all good

Very few of the rock stars of the strip era (which is where I place the Ducks for ease of description) have seen price increases, or even tread water against inflation, in the last 20 years. 

Schulz is the exception to the very cruel rule. 

Edited February 10, 2018 by comix4fun

[jjonahjameson11]

18 minutes ago, comix4fun said:

Very few of the rock stars of the strip era have seen price increases, or even treat water against inflation, in the last 20 years. 

Schulz is the exception to the very cruel rule. 

...which is very intriguing to me, considering I've never understood the appeal of this strip at all.

Edited February 10, 2018 by jjonahjameson11

[cstojano]

1 hour ago, PhilipB2k17 said:

What would you rather own? The Stephens Vampirella cover? Or the Carl Barks duck painting? I’m speaking to everyone here, not just Gene specifically because I know he’s a big Vampirella art, and Stephens fan, so that cover probably hits his Collector sweet spot. 

I can't see the prices either will bring, just not for me I suppose. But then I am eyeing <gulp> Kirby 2001 art, which tells you something about my off kilter taste

[Ricksneatstuff]

50 minutes ago, comix4fun said:

Very few of the rock stars of the strip era (which is where I place the Ducks for ease of description) have seen price increases, or even treat water against inflation, in the last 20 years. 

Schulz is the exception to the very cruel rule. 

Herriman and Segar don’t fare too bad either. 

[comix4fun]

3 minutes ago, Ricksneatstuff said:

Herriman and Segar don’t fare too bad either. 

They do ok generally, but you've got great examples of Herriman selling recently for less than or (best case) equal to sales from 10-15 years ago. That's why I mentioned treading water against inflation or worse.

I don't really follow Segar but I didn't notice much spike in the public auction. 

I guess every artist/title/strip has their day in the sun.

 

[comix4fun]

54 minutes ago, jjonahjameson11 said:

...which is very intriguing to me, considering I've never understood the appeal of this strip at all.

Peanuts?

Aside from running for 50 years, and being a staple of three generations of children (maybe it was only in America) on almost every major holiday with their TV specials, and being a licensing giant making itself ubiquitous....it really spoke in a true way to so many emotions and situations that faced everyone growing up and beyond.

Other than that I don't get it either. 

[suspense39]

38 minutes ago, Ricksneatstuff said:

Herriman and Segar don’t fare too bad either. 

, yeah they seem to be doing fine, Herriman has been going steadily up as far as I can tell, no dramatic jumps really just slow rise.....Segar seems to be flat, but holding its value. 

[Bronty]

1 hour ago, comix4fun said:

Peanuts?

Aside from running for 50 years, and being a staple of three generations of children (maybe it was only in America) on almost every major holiday with their TV specials, and being a licensing giant making itself ubiquitous....it really spoke in a true way to so many emotions and situations that faced everyone growing up and beyond.

Other than that I don't get it either. 

To be fair, when I read them growing up in the mid 80s to late 90s, I thought they were incredibly unfunny and lame.      It was only when I went back and read the 1950 - 1980 material, esp the 50-65 period, that I understood what a joy the strip is.    Maybe he just hasn't read the right ones.

[comix4fun]

Just now, Bronty said:

To be fair, when I read them growing up in the mid 80s to late 90s, I thought they were incredibly unfunny and lame.      It was only when I went back and read the 1950 - 1980 material, esp the 50-65 period, that I understood what a joy the strip is.    Maybe he just hasn't read the right ones.

That's true....you will get a different vibe depending on the era.

I fell in love with Peanuts when I was a small child, watching the animated specials. They really spoke to me from an early age and when I got older I took something different from them, but still moving. 

It didn't start as the printed strip for me. I grew into those, and it was the earlier ones, when collected in book form (from that earlier era) that I remember best. 

 

[Bronty]

17 hours ago, Ricksneatstuff said:

Others from the same auction a couple months ago

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/charles-schulz-peanuts-daily-comic-strip-original-art-dated-6-24-66-united-feature-syndicate-1966-/a/7169-93190.s?ic4=ListView-Thumbnail-071515

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/charles-schulz-peanuts-daily-comic-strip-original-art-dated-8-6-53-united-feature-syndicate-1953-/a/7169-93187.s?ic4=ListView-Thumbnail-071515

Da fuq!!!

[comix4fun]

1 minute ago, Bronty said:

Da fuq!!!

Yeah, seriously. 

I remember there as a discussion here, in the thread for that auction....as those prices were posting in real time. 

No one could figure it out. The closest to an explanation was that people thought the Santa Rosa fire that took Schulz's home mistakenly led to the assumption that his retained works were destroyed too.

No one else could really figure out what his the Sam Hill was happening.