November HA auction 2 2

[delekkerste]

21 hours ago, vodou said:

2800 ---not even worth selling. Not that you knew that going in but still. A harsh critical eye at your own holdings sometimes means just living with certain pieces until you die. "Buy what you love" should be followed with "and are happy eating cost on and dying with". You have your reasons for the buy but also the sell. But I know there are pieces I have where the former applies and I've always applied the latter too. Always. 

People fall out of love with pieces all the time.  That Enric Vampi painting was once my favorite piece in my collection; 11 years later, though, it no longer fit and it had become an eyesore to my wife.  No one should take art they no longer love to the grave just because they overpaid for it in the first place. 

Casting "a harsh critical eye" may mean ejecting something from your collection that no longer fits, even if you know that you will take a loss on it.  And, given that these gallery paintings have sold in a wide range of prices, both before and after I sold mine, it wasn't clear by any means that a loss was certain.  While I did expect to lose money on it, I certainly did not expect to lose 81% (after fees) - had I had any inkling that it could, let alone would, do that poorly, I wouldn't have risked it at auction.  

Anyway, maybe we'll hear less horror stories like this in the future as prices reset at lower, more potentially sustainable levels. 

21 hours ago, vodou said:

So no, I wouldn't be rolling in my grave if I was dead or if it was my buy/sell either, I wouldn't have sold or wouldn't have bought* to begin with.

Um, yeah, normal people don't ret-con the entire initial premise away by putting yourself into that person's shoes from the outset and saying they would never have ended up in the premise that we're talking about.   

[comix4fun]

Just now, delekkerste said:

Um, yeah, normal people don't ret-con the entire initial premise away by putting yourself into that person's shoes from the outset and saying they would never have ended up in the premise that we're talking about.   

 

[vodou]

56 minutes ago, Jay Olie Espy said:

Yeah, I utilized the 1% rebate about 8 weeks ago. 
 

Neither here nor there, but if you use a 1.5% cash back card aren’t you getting charged 2.5% for using a credit card?

Previous to 11/15 credit cards (under the 2500 threshold) were FOC. The 2.5% was recently added. Of course now it makes no sense (losing 1%). Soon enough we'll all be back to paper checks in the mail and three week holds for full bank clearance. Another two years of this and we'll be trading cowry shells or katanga crosses for art ha ha.

[vodou]

1 hour ago, delekkerste said:

it had become an eyesore to my wife.

And there you go. You lose the art, you lose the money, you win the wife and family that followed. You won overall (I hope!)

1 hour ago, delekkerste said:

Um, yeah, normal people don't ret-con the entire initial premise away by putting yourself into that person's shoes from the outset and saying they would never have ended up in the premise that we're talking about.   

Oh I didn't ret-con anything; I rejected your premise because I wouldn't make the same mistake.

I'm sorry that you did.

Hopefully you've learned to only buy what your wife currently and always will approve of go forward

[Bronty]

Who cares what the wife approves of guys?    I completely understand that pov for art on the wall but it’s not like most of us don’t also have art that’s not on the wall?    The wives usually wont give a shyt if it’s not on the wall so why worry about it, you can still own it if you want to ... just don’t hang it 

Edited November 25, 2019 by Bronty

[delekkerste]

 

15 minutes ago, vodou said:

Oh I didn't ret-con anything; I rejected your premise because I wouldn't make the same mistake.

I'm sorry that you did.

 

The punchline was that you would be mortified at such a low ROI, since you have routinely dismissed anything that generates a sub-Vodou standard ROI, let alone taking a bath as bad as I did on that piece. That you wouldn't have made this particular mistake is irrelevant to the parameters of the joke; no need to go back in time to kill Sarah Connor, bro. 

Edited November 25, 2019 by delekkerste

[delekkerste]

8 minutes ago, Bronty said:

Who cares what the wife approves of guys?    I completely understand that pov for art on the wall but it’s not like most of us don’t also have art that’s not on the wall?    The wives usually wont give a shyt if it’s not on the wall so why worry about it, you can still own it if you want to ... just don’t hang it 

This piece was 39 x 52" before the frame went on (making it even larger).  Not something you can just slip into an Itoya and hide away.  Pretty much the only place it would fit is on the wall unless you unframed it and rolled it up, which probably isn't great for long-term preservation. 

Much better to let it go to someone who will display it in all of its glory. 

 

Edited November 25, 2019 by delekkerste

[Bronty]

If the art is six foot tall framed and you live in Manhattan, I guess I have to agree.    Two feet tall or say.. cleveland and I’d argue the point though

[Bronty]

Jeez what did it cost you to ship that to heritage anyways?    Couldn’t have been cheap

[vodou]

1 minute ago, delekkerste said:

The punchline was that you would be mortified at such a low ROI

I would be if I'd bought for ROI purposes and that was the result.

I buy two ways: for myself (purely) and myself (and performance).

The former is dead money the moment the money is out of my hands, to die with art, and it doesn't matter what it's "worth" then, now, later, because it's both worthless and infinitely valuable while I'm alive as it's not going back to market in my lifetime (barring negative life-changing circumstances).

The latter is much more selective and geared toward an investment profile first that I also enjoy second. These pieces need to perform worst case: double in five years (but more conservatively two to three) and are jettisoned as they lag but long before they reach that five year fail point. Then future strategy is updated accordingly.

 

But you didn't buy any of that materia for ROI purposes, did you? (and please don't tell me what purpose you did buy for ) So -for me above- "former" not "latter" model. And for sure - I didn't marry anybody that wasn't understanding and accepting of the entire thing as "it" is "who I am" and was always described in detail very early on in any dating situation that might have legs

Circumstances (acquiring a wife) changed. Consider the loss part of your wedding/marital expenses overall to be netted against the savings by consolidating two households into one (by cohabitating!)

[vodou]

11 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

unless you unframed it and rolled it up, which probably isn't great for long-term preservation. 

Tell that to Clyfford Still

12 minutes ago, delekkerste said:

Much better to let it go to someone who will display it in all of its glory. 

I can't disagree considering the wife situation.

[delekkerste]

18 minutes ago, Bronty said:

Jeez what did it cost you to ship that to heritage anyways?    Couldn’t have been cheap

I took it out of the frame and delivered it to Heritage's NYC office rolled up in a tube.  

Shipping it framed in a wood crate would probably have cost almost as much as it ended up selling for!  

[vodou]

1 minute ago, delekkerste said:

I took it out of the frame and delivered it to Heritage's NYC office rolled up in a tube.  

Shipping it framed in a wood crate would probably have cost almost as much as it ended up selling for!  

$1,000 for that size "all in" by art specialists, LA to NH, two years ago, but I agree you're not far off

[grapeape]

3 hours ago, delekkerste said:

Must be a villain guy 

[grapeape]

2 hours ago, delekkerste said:

People fall out of love with pieces all the time.  That Enric Vampi painting was once my favorite piece in my collection; 11 years later, though, it no longer fit and it had become an eyesore to my wife.  No one should take art they no longer love to the grave just because they overpaid for it in the first place. 

Casting "a harsh critical eye" may mean ejecting something from your collection that no longer fits, even if you know that you will take a loss on it.  And, given that these gallery paintings have sold in a wide range of prices, both before and after I sold mine, it wasn't clear by any means that a loss was certain.  While I did expect to lose money on it, I certainly did not expect to lose 81% (after fees) - had I had any inkling that it could, let alone would, do that poorly, I wouldn't have risked it at auction.  

Anyway, maybe we'll hear less horror stories like this in the future as prices reset at lower, more potentially sustainable levels. 

Um, yeah, normal people don't ret-con the entire initial premise away by putting yourself into that person's shoes from the outset and saying they would never have ended up in the premise that we're talking about.   

Almost everyone who took losses here I had empathy for. Some are friends and some are board friends I’ve come to admire.

That being said, there were some happy winners out there who paid less than they might have expected. The long timers in here get it.

Was a time when I got the better end of it nearly every time.

Then things evened out some.

You just don’t want to be the collector taking losses all the time. There are times to throw caution to the wind and there are times to be prudent. I wish for all my friends here to be on the happy side of the deal.

Edited November 25, 2019 by grapeape

[Tatterdamillion]

On 11/23/2019 at 11:31 AM, Dayzen said:

 

i learned a new math equation while studying the results. MZCAC/C = SBSSC/C

Spoiler

Mike Zeck Captain America Cover = Steven Butler Silver Sable Cover

 

[vodou]

3 minutes ago, Tatterdamillion said:

i learned a new math equation while studying the results. MZCAC/C = SBSSC/C

  Hide contents

Mike Zeck Captain America Cover = Steven Butler Silver Sable Cover

 

Only in the Twilight Zone, or when it's probably the worst Zeck example there is

[grapeape]

4 minutes ago, Tatterdamillion said:

i learned a new math equation while studying the results. MZCAC/C = SBSSC/C

  Hide contents

Mike Zeck Captain America Cover = Steven Butler Silver Sable Cover

 

[zhamlau]

17 minutes ago, Tatterdamillion said:

i learned a new math equation while studying the results. MZCAC/C = SBSSC/C

  Hide contents

Mike Zeck Captain America Cover = Steven Butler Silver Sable Cover

 

I was getting nearly 300 a page for average content Butler Sable this auction. I have been doing well with them for a while, its one of those niche things that a few guys go after.

1 hour ago, Bronty said:

Jeez what did it cost you to ship that to heritage anyways?    Couldn’t have been cheap

If you don't live in NYC or someplace HA has offices, you can always just meet one of their rep's at a convention and do a hand off there. Part of the reason I do the NJ art show 2x a year, besides seeing all the art and making some purchases, is that I can just hand my material off (after an inventory session) at the end of the show. It really saves a lot of money, especially if you have like 200-300 pieces.

 

Edited November 25, 2019 by zhamlau

[Tatterdamillion]

I don't mind the Zeck cover. Its not his finest work but it is at least Zeck and Captain America. To think that even a primo Steven Butler Silver Sable cover could equal the value of a left handed Zeck cover (not sure if he is right handed) is basically new math.