Jan Heritage Auction putting up some nice artwork 4 4

[delekkerste]

On 1/18/2022 at 1:17 PM, Bronty said:

You know, I bet that piece wouldn't do too badly in this environment.

Over/under?

30-50k?  More, less?

I know that sounds crazy, but is it?   Maybe it is.   I can't tell anymore.    But its a desirable era #1 issue associated with spidey.   I have a hard time imagining that not going for at least a half decent chunk.

Are we talking Marvel Tails #1 (1st appearance of Peter Porker) from 1983 or Peter Porker #1 from 1985? 

I bet Marvel Tails #1 is a 6-figure cover in this market environment. Wouldn't have been the case a few years ago, but, between the molten market and Into the Spider-Verse, I think it's all but certain nowadays. 

Even Peter Porker #1 probably fetches big money I would think.  

 

[Bronty]

On 1/18/2022 at 1:29 PM, delekkerste said:

Are we talking Marvel Tails #1 (1st appearance of Peter Porker) from 1983 or Peter Porker #1 from 1985? 

I bet Marvel Tails #1 is a 6-figure cover in this market environment. Wouldn't have been the case a few years ago, but, between the molten market and Into the Spider-Verse, I think it's all but certain nowadays. 

Even Peter Porker #1 probably fetches big money I would think.  

 

See, and I was afraid I was being too bullish with 30-50k.  

Crazy.

I meant Marvel Tails tbh I forgot there WAS a separate Peter Porker 1, but that's good perspective.

[batman_fan]

On 1/18/2022 at 11:01 AM, Rick2you2 said:

Which site was it?

I should have spelled at “sight”

[Bronty]

On 1/18/2022 at 1:29 PM, delekkerste said:

Are we talking Marvel Tails #1 (1st appearance of Peter Porker) from 1983 or Peter Porker #1 from 1985? 

I bet Marvel Tails #1 is a 6-figure cover in this market environment. Wouldn't have been the case a few years ago, but, between the molten market and Into the Spider-Verse, I think it's all but certain nowadays. 

Even Peter Porker #1 probably fetches big money I would think.  

 

One result I don't understand along these lines, in my head anyways, is the No Prize 1 cover.    Great Stan/Doc Doom image and it only went for 9k not that long ago?

That's the result in the archives that made me second guess myself lower.

Any thoughts on that one?

[delekkerste]

On 1/18/2022 at 1:35 PM, Bronty said:

One result I don't understand along these lines, in my head anyways, is the No Prize 1 cover.    Great Stan/Doc Doom image and it only went for 9k not that long ago?

That's the result in the archives that made me second guess myself lower.

Any thoughts on that one?

My friend consigned it.  July 10, 2020 was pre-parabolic rise in the OA market...I sold some stuff around then which has probably doubled since.  If it were re-sold today, it would fetch a much higher price I'm sure.  

That said, it's an upside-down Stan Lee as Doc Doom...it's upside potential is definitely capped compared to anything with true 1st appearance/movie hype/mainstream appeal value.

[Bronty]

On 1/18/2022 at 1:40 PM, delekkerste said:

My friend consigned it.  July 10, 2020 was pre-parabolic rise in the OA market...I sold some stuff around then which has probably doubled since.  If it were re-sold today, it would fetch a much higher price I'm sure.  

That said, it's an upside-down Stan Lee as Doc Doom...it's upside potential is definitely capped compared to anything with true 1st appearance/movie hype/mainstream appeal value.

I always looked at that as a positive.    How many covers with the mascot of Marvel (let alone dressed up as a classic villain) are there?   There's basically this and the Fumetti book, and the Fumetti book is a photo IIRC.

I.e. I understand your reasoning, and agree in part, but... 10k (or let's call it 20) doesn't buy much in a marvel cover from that era, and there's lots of Stan fans out there.

I guess I should have bid then! 

 

[fsumavila]

On 1/18/2022 at 1:35 PM, Bronty said:

One result I don't understand along these lines, in my head anyways, is the No Prize 1 cover.    Great Stan/Doc Doom image and it only went for 9k not that long ago?

That's the result in the archives that made me second guess myself lower.

Any thoughts on that one?

I remember that cover when it went on the auction block. I wanted to go after it but had no funds in my art piggy bank at the time. Just a great image... and published images of Stan are sooo hard to find! Definitely a bargain for the winning bidder...

[delekkerste]

On 1/18/2022 at 1:48 PM, Bronty said:

I always looked at that as a positive.    How many covers with the mascot of Marvel (let alone dressed up as a classic villain) are there?   There's basically this and the Fumetti book, and the Fumetti book is a photo IIRC.

I.e. I understand your reasoning, and agree in part, but... 10k (or let's call it 20) doesn't buy much in a marvel cover from that era, and there's lots of Stan fans out there.

I guess I should have bid then! 

[Bronty]

I wanted it, but I don't chase much comic art.   If I had known 9k would win it , I would have bid at the time.    

Its a fondly remembered cover at least for me.    Maybe not quite Groo level, but still pretty good ;)

[BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES]

On 1/18/2022 at 1:05 PM, delekkerste said:

Much as the meme itself makes me chuckle, this could also be used as an example of how 99.9% of the things which sold for six figures during the recent auctions would not be recognized as desirable by a selectively chosen group of people.  Of all the things that sold for big money recently, the folks in earshot of his Hawaiian shirt would probably not have recognized or responded to anything beyond "the first Superman comic" or "the first Batman comic" as having any value

 

 

Edited January 18, 2022 by BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES

[RBerman]

On 1/18/2022 at 3:46 PM, BLUECHIPCOLLECTIBLES said:

Much as the meme itself makes me chuckle, this could also be used as an example of how 99.9% of the things which sold for six figures during the recent auctions would not be recognized as desirable by a selectively chosen group of people.  Of all the things that sold for big money recently, the folks in earshot of his Hawaiian shirt would probably not have recognized or responded to anything beyond "the first Superman comic" or "the first Batman comic" as having any value

 

 

This seems like a general property of collectibles. They are immensely valuable to a small circle of people, all of whom want some rare thing. And the rest of the world just gives blank stares about why you spent good money on a guitar pick or postcard or statuette or oil painting of a tree or old baseball or used swimsuit or...

[Will_K]

On 1/17/2022 at 10:18 PM, Nexus said:

Per Barry Sandoval in our chat today, the phone has been ringing off the hook with new consignments at HA since the sale last week.

He gave us the scoop that one of them is a TOS #39 page.

Also, an '80s Marvel #1 cover to be revealed soon.

http://www.felixcomicart.com/chatdetail.asp?cId=40

Dazzler #1

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/bob-larkin-dazzler-1-cover-original-art-marvel-1981-/p/7270-40001.s?ic4=GalleryView-ShortDescription-071515

[cloud cloddie]

I was looking at sold lots, and this is another one that's kinda a wtf on price... I love Sienk, but that seems excessive for a recreation...

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/bill-sienkiewicz-dark-knight-iii-the-master-race-8-cover-re-creation-original-art-dc-2016-/a/7266-94100.s?ic4=GalleryView-ShortDescription-071515

[malvin]

On 1/19/2022 at 10:55 PM, cloud cloddie said:

I was looking at sold lots, and this is another one that's kinda a wtf on price... I love Sienk, but that seems excessive for a recreation...

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/bill-sienkiewicz-dark-knight-iii-the-master-race-8-cover-re-creation-original-art-dc-2016-/a/7266-94100.s?ic4=GalleryView-ShortDescription-071515

It's the weekly auction but I thought this was more WTF...

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/gabriele-dell-otto-batman-specialty-illustration-original-art-2009-/a/322203-48050.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515&fbclid=IwAR2MN83BBe-VOaIMAIJFW8qViMPzLliYvbN70dSHs5N3Gvw_aC0YZXvaotI

Malvin

[wurstisart]

On 1/20/2022 at 8:08 AM, malvin said:

It's the weekly auction but I thought this was more WTF...

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/gabriele-dell-otto-batman-specialty-illustration-original-art-2009-/a/322203-48050.s?ic4=GalleryView-Thumbnail-071515&fbclid=IwAR2MN83BBe-VOaIMAIJFW8qViMPzLliYvbN70dSHs5N3Gvw_aC0YZXvaotI

Malvin

Unless the buyer knows this will or was a cover or published in any way, I totally agree, but like i said, maybe he/she knows something we are missing. 

[wurstisart]

On 1/18/2022 at 7:29 PM, delekkerste said:

Are we talking Marvel Tails #1 (1st appearance of Peter Porker) from 1983 or Peter Porker #1 from 1985? 

I bet Marvel Tails #1 is a 6-figure cover in this market environment. Wouldn't have been the case a few years ago, but, between the molten market and Into the Spider-Verse, I think it's all but certain nowadays. 

Even Peter Porker #1 probably fetches big money I would think.  

 

Awesome that Porker is part of this conversation, love it !

Not the first ever cover, but I have a early one in my collection. Check it out if you like.
There is not a whole lot out in the market, interior page wise, I think I saw less than a handful of pages over the last 10 years or so. 

The stuff is out there. Somewhere.

[fsumavila]

On 1/20/2022 at 1:55 AM, cloud cloddie said:

I was looking at sold lots, and this is another one that's kinda a wtf on price... I love Sienk, but that seems excessive for a recreation...

https://comics.ha.com/itm/original-comic-art/bill-sienkiewicz-dark-knight-iii-the-master-race-8-cover-re-creation-original-art-dc-2016-/a/7266-94100.s?ic4=GalleryView-ShortDescription-071515

WOW. Beautiful piece, but yeah. Sky-high for a recreation

[aqn83]

On 1/20/2022 at 7:27 AM, fsumavila said:

WOW. Beautiful piece, but yeah. Sky-high for a recreation

Yeah, it's a LARGE piece too, at 18x24. I know the consigner of this piece and we were both watching it going out of our minds. I gave it a 3500 cap, and it just kept rising and rising.

 

[Rick2you2]

On 1/19/2022 at 1:03 PM, RBerman said:

This seems like a general property of collectibles. They are immensely valuable to a small circle of people, all of whom want some rare thing. And the rest of the world just gives blank stares about why you spent good money on a guitar pick or postcard or statuette or oil painting of a tree or old baseball or used swimsuit or...

But, they only retain their value if the interest in the collectibles passes to a new generation. And even then, different parts of a market will rise and fall based on familiarity. Collectors used to love old colonial furniture. While the best of it retains value, at least in theory, more collectible now is mid-century modern and real Art Deco. 

One of the comments I have made here on several occasions is whether “the market” should really be considered now as a group of submarkets moving at different rates, and maybe directions. 

[RBerman]

On 1/20/2022 at 10:30 AM, Rick2you2 said:

But, they only retain their value if the interest in the collectibles passes to a new generation. And even then, different parts of a market will rise and fall based on familiarity. Collectors used to love old colonial furniture. While the best of it retains value, at least in theory, more collectible now is mid-century modern and real Art Deco. 

One of the comments I have made here on several occasions is whether “the market” should really be considered now as a group of submarkets moving at different rates, and maybe directions. 

Quite so. It's very complicated and difficult to prognosticate. Daniel Kahneman won the Nobel Prize by showing how computer models of the stock market failed to mimic actual human behavior, because the computers were logical, and people are not.