• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

SCANDAL!!!! Spidey 100 Cover

Started by wallcrawler-migration,

20 posts in this topic

wallcrawler-migration

wallcrawler-migration

Posted
Posted

Word from a VERY good source is that there was collusion on the ASM #100 cover auction!!! Supposedly Spencer Beck gave someone a last right of refusal on the auction (and any of the upcoming auctions) because this person helped Mr. Beck put the deal together to aqcuire the collection(s) . I've also heard that Mr. Burkey, the winner of he auction, has already offered his "grail" for sale. Does this imply that Mr. Burkey is the "someone" who is in collusion with Mr. Beck? Shouldn't have Mr. Beck discolsed the to all bidders at the outset? How does this affect the integrity of his future auctions?

 

I leave it to the board to discuss the further implications of this scandal.

 

893whatthe.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wallcrawler-migration

wallcrawler-migration

Posted
  • Author
Posted

So why should us peons even bother to bid? Presume I and a few other people offer $50k for the cover under Beck's stringent cash terms. Now the "colluder" knows the all cash value and buys it for $50,200 and turns around and sells it for a higher price with more favorable terms either over time or for cash/trade.

 

I've also heard other values ($80k) tossed around on the list and the "L" which the "colluder" can use to establish his new value.

 

So the legitimate bidders who are in the dark as to the true outcome of the auction will get the carpet pulled out from under us unless we bid to a level wher the "colluder" thinks there is no profit in swiping the piece.

 

This situation is cr*ap, but not suprising. It also explains Beck's auction terms which were probably set to intentionally exclude alot of potential bidders.

 

 

Based on the nature of the "auction" I don't think there can be any "scandal" in regards to the way it turned out. He basically reserved the right to do whatever he wanted in the end, and if that's what he did then confused-smiley-013.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Solar

Solar

Posted
Posted

This was more of a "taking offers" situation than a true auction anyway. Spencer was in control of the sale and conducted it how he wanted to. I cant fault him for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rob_react

rob_react

Posted
Posted
So why should us peons even bother to bid? Presume I and a few other people offer $50k for the cover under Beck's stringent cash terms. Now the "colluder" knows the all cash value and buys it for $50,200 and turns around and sells it for a higher price with more favorable terms either over time or for cash/trade.

 

I've also heard other values ($80k) tossed around on the list and the "L" which the "colluder" can use to establish his new value.

 

So the legitimate bidders who are in the dark as to the true outcome of the auction will get the carpet pulled out from under us unless we bid to a level wher the "colluder" thinks there is no profit in swiping the piece.

 

This situation is cr*ap, but not suprising. It also explains Beck's auction terms which were probably set to intentionally exclude alot of potential bidders.

 

Again confused-smiley-013.gif I'm not arguing any of your points, I guess I just don't see what the point is in complaining about it. It was a unique, opaque situation from the very beginning and Beck stated, RIGHT UP FRONT, that he could do whatever he wanted in the end anyway. He was honest about that and to me, that removes any hint of "scandal" from the transaction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wallcrawler-migration

wallcrawler-migration

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Agreed... and that is a true scandal. The consigners will probably never know how much the collaborators will profit over and above what they get. And the consignor(s) put their trust in Beck to represent them. This hobby/business is full of theives.

 

How good do you think the sellers will feel about the situation if they start receiving paltry amounts for pieces that should be selling much higher?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
heartened

heartened

Posted
Posted

As others have pointed out, this sale was certainly more of a "taking offers" situation, rather than a true auction. We all do this. We have a piece for sale and get offered a certain amount, so naturally we'll look around to see what others will pay, and then ask the original buyer whether he can top those offers.

 

Personally, the cover sounded better before I was able to look at the cover. I was unimpressed at how it looked in its present state. And, while I said that it would be an 80K cover if it DIDN'T have some condition problems, it is more of a 50K cover in its present state. Who knows what Burkey paid, though. Could be as low as 40K... who knows? I guess if he's planning on selling it, then we may find out at some point.

 

Best,

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comix4fun

comix4fun

Posted
Posted

I've also heard that Mr. Burkey, the winner of he auction, has already offered his "grail" for sale. Does this imply that Mr. Burkey is the "someone" who is in collusion with Mr. Beck? I leave it to the board to discuss the further implications of this scandal.

 

You should know that posing this as a question does not excuse you from defamation. Especially when you end the questions with a statement like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comix4fun

comix4fun

Posted
Posted

I've also heard other values ($80k) tossed around on the list and the "L" which the "colluder" can use to establish his new value.

 

I have a couple of friends that went after this and did not get it. Granted their level of sour grapes does not approach yours. But the number was extremely healthy from what I heard. A number that won't make it easy to flip.

 

 

It also explains Beck's auction terms which were probably set to intentionally exclude alot of potential bidders.

 

Spencer has run his auctions/offers like this for years. I have participated on quite a few. It is not ideal, bidding in the dark, but I have never seen or heard of anything sinister.

 

As for the auction terms maybe you should check out Spencer's site.. He doesn't take credit cards, for anything. He is cash and check (with the checks clearing before shipment) for everything...and has been for all the years I have seen his site.

 

I would prefer to have an open bidding system, but I don't own the art and I was not the selling rep on this deal. It was Spencer's choice and if you knew all the parties involved you could assume with great certainty that there is no way they are working together. This is sounding alot like sour grapes bordering on defaming Spencer Beck and Mike Burkey. A small word of advice, if it were me, I would be a little more careful about the accusations that you make on a public board they count as publication.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comix4fun

comix4fun

Posted
Posted

Agreed... and that is a true scandal. The consigners will probably never know how much the collaborators will profit over and above what they get. And the consignor(s) put their trust in Beck to represent them. This hobby/business is full of theives.

 

 

Okey doke, that's enough....I have known Spencer and Burkey for years and nothing you have noted, none of the 2nd and 3rd hand "I heard it from a friend who...heard it from a friend who..." sounds like solid proof to me of anything. You are going to have to get alot more specific and alot more in depth before you can call Mike Burkey and Spencer Beck thieves or even to imply that this auction/offer was not handled legitimately.

 

I would have loved to get this cover for myself, but I couldn't.

I have bid in Spencer's auction/offers before and lost out too, but I have never let it bother me enough to create a conspiracy that makes both the seller and the winning bidder out to be thieves. How incredibily irresponsible of you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
krazykat-migration

krazykat-migration

Posted
Posted

This whole thing sounds fishy,..

 

an e-mail goes out that evidences 'sordid action'...

 

and Spencer owns up to it ( on the Comic Art-L ) with the statement,.... "I did that on purpose, I wanted to see if I could trust someone"...

 

I dont know,..sounds very 3rd gradish to me : (

 

KK

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comix4fun

comix4fun

Posted
Posted

"I heard it from a friend who...heard it from a friend who..." sounds like solid proof to me of anything.

 

 

Actually, that sounds more like REO Speedwagon.

 

 

 

 

Yep and they heard from another that they were messing around... foreheadslap.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rob_react

rob_react

Posted
Posted

The full quote:

 

" From: Theartistschoice@***.***

Subject: Re: Re: WHO GOT AMAZING SPIDER-MAN #100 COVER ART? GULP....."ME"

 

OK ... I am not going to respond on their list ... but here is my response

to these idiotic accusations....

 

THERE IS NO SCANDAL

 

The story that I emailed someone and told them that I was going to allow

"last licks" to the person who set me up in the first place for this deal to

happen is TRUE.

 

However, I made the entire story up to see if I could trust this person and I

was proven that I could not.

 

FOR THE RECORD ... NO SUCH PERSON EXISTS !!!

 

The person who introduced me to the owners of this artwork in NOT EVEN A

COLLECTOR of comic book artwork at all. They are simply a friend who introduced me

to the owner(s) of the art that I am going to be placing for sale over the

next few months.

 

Also, the rumors that I was offered 80K for the piece is a joke. Both the

owner and I could only WISH I got an offer of 80K.

 

And for the record ... KRAZYKAT has NEVER owned the cover to Amazing

Spiderman # 100. The Amazing Spiderman piece was given PERSONALLY by John Romita, Sr.

to the owner somewhere around 30 years ago and it has been in their house all

of these years.

 

So basically ... this thread is all a bunch of crud and as far as I am

concerned, are spewing sour grapes because they could not get the artwork ... Gee

... how often has that ever happened in this hobby??

 

Personally, I find it all quite amusing. I simply look at the source and

laugh at immature nature and quite slanderous wording of their posts.

 

So ... if anyone wants to post this to that message board fell free... I have

nothing to hide and quite simply am amused by the sheer pettiness of their

posts.

 

Spencer R. Beck

The Artist's Choice

http://www.theartistschoice.com

"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing