Are OA prices out of control? 7 7

[Terry E. Gibbs]

On 6/17/2024 at 11:38 AM, Michael Browning said:

. I rarely sell or trade away anything nowadays, so that is hard to answer.

The Flash splash to 153 last September had been one of yours ??  Was that you, or how long ago had you sold it.

[Xatari]

On 6/17/2024 at 5:45 AM, jjonahjameson11 said:

"Are OA prices out of control?"

not sure if they're out of control from auction houses, but they are definitely out of control at convention (Baltimore, Heroes, NYCC) 'charity' auction.  Yes, i understand that some/most of the funds raised goes to worthwhile causes, the fact remains that people pay stOOpid money at these things, far more than similar pieces would sell at clink, ha, cc, ebay, etc.

Not just dealers any more. Doesn’t help when certain art reps have their associates bid their artists’ items up at these charity auctions to protect their future sales prices when they go to release an art drop. I’m looking at you Heroes Charity auction this past weekend. 

[comix4fun]

On 6/17/2024 at 7:43 PM, Xatari said:

Not just dealers any more. Doesn’t help when certain art reps have their associates bid their artists’ items up at these charity auctions to protect their future sales prices when they go to release an art drop. I’m looking at you Heroes Charity auction this past weekend. 

Which piece or pieces specifically?

[tth2]

On 6/18/2024 at 8:43 AM, Xatari said:

Not just dealers any more. Doesn’t help when certain art reps have their associates bid their artists’ items up at these charity auctions to protect their future sales prices when they go to release an art drop. I’m looking at you Heroes Charity auction this past weekend. 

Isn't it good that the pieces are going for a lot if the proceeds are going to charity?

[Nexus]

On 6/17/2024 at 5:43 PM, Xatari said:

Not just dealers any more. Doesn’t help when certain art reps have their associates bid their artists’ items up at these charity auctions to protect their future sales prices when they go to release an art drop. I’m looking at you Heroes Charity auction this past weekend. 

Sigh. I had a feeling there would be a conspiracy theory around this. Not surprised at all, though, that it's coming from Xatari.

For those who don't know: I was at Heroescon this past weekend with a few artists. Including Daniel Warren Johnson. Dan did a live painting demo on Saturday, and donated the piece to the auction taking place that night. All proceeds to benefit the show.

Before the auction, we all went out to dinner. While we were waiting to be served, I posted a pic of the art to socials to help promote the auction:

https://www.instagram.com/p/C8QP1PyPZRI/

Albert Moy saw my post and texted our mutual friend Lambert to bid on his behalf. At no point before, during, or after the auction did I talk/text with Albert. For that matter, at no point before or during the auction did I reach out to any potential bidders. My preference for any sale, public or private, is to let things play out organically. Which they did here.

Albert ended up winning the piece at auction for $11K. All his communication with Lambert was via text, and that would back up everything here. Everything having to do with his bidding was between him and Lambert. I wasn't even with Lambert during the bidding. I had sought out Dan and we watched it all go down in the back of the room. Neither one of us was expecting this number. I consider myself Dan's longest fan/collector/champion, and *I* wouldn't pay that number.

Does this sale help Dan's market? I suppose it doesn't hurt, but not really otherwise. His art values are fairly well established already. But let's say it flopped and sold for $100. At this point, that would also have had zero impact. I guarantee you the next art drop for Dan will be just fine, regardless of how one piece did at a show auction. High or low.

As it turned out, Albert's max bid was a LOT HIGHER than $11K. If I cared, then this should have been juiced to an even more ridiculous number. All the underbidders were in the room. Ask any of them if I approached them to talk about this piece or this auction before or during the bidding. They all bid what they wanted to bid with no influence from me.

I've been selling art on behalf artists for 10+ years now. We've gotten where we are with no games or shenanigans. I'm happy to let the market decide. When pieces come back up for sale/auction, I don't bid to "protect values". I don't ask anyone to do that on my behalf, either. I try to keep tabs on resale values, but my chief concern is keeping interest high in the artists and their art. Everything else will take care of itself.

I was a collector long before I became a rep. My posting history here goes back nearly 20 years. I've never been a fan of the speculators/gamblers/flippers who become interested in comic art for its "investment potential" above all else. That didn't change when I became a rep. Those who enter the hobby from speculating in rookie sports cards and apply that view to first appearance comic art, for example, are gamblers. They're not collectors. They might try to convince everyone else otherwise, but I'm not buying it. I'm not at all shocked that they have become my saltiest critics and detractors. My posting history will also show that I've never been shy about speaking up. Will continue to do so.

[Kevn]

I just want to say that I appreciate the clarity and frankness about the above example of the Heroescon auction. I'm almost completely disconnected from the network of OA collectors, and this board and CAF are my primary eyes and ears on the pastime. So for me at least it can be frustrating when I read allusions to "certain dealers/artists/auction houses/collectors," just as it's frustrating when people are excessively vague in their comments and complaints (for example "OA prices are too high!" and "OA prices are collapsing" threads happening simultaneously). And I don't mean that threads like this aren't meaningful or valid, just that the sweeping generalizations about a hobby and art form that is incredibly disparate and nuanced isn't very useful. 

[Twanj]

On 6/18/2024 at 2:59 AM, Nexus said:

Does this sale help Dan's market? I suppose it doesn't hurt, but not really otherwise. His art values are fairly well established already. But let's say it flopped and sold for $100. At this point, that would also have had zero impact. I guarantee you the next art drop for Dan will be just fine, regardless of how one piece did at a show auction. High or low.

Every charity auction I've ever heard of has gone nuts, to the point that if it's something I want I don't even bother bidding. There's no point! It's awesome they raise a bunch for causes and I have no reason to show off and overpay.

[Will_K]

I have no idea how to value art that I'm not even considering to buy.  And I don't know the finances of other collectors.

Attended most of the first half of the HeroesCon auction and left a little after the DWJ piece was auctioned.  I think getting the most $$$ for any piece is part of the auctioneer's job description.   So if something goes for more than MSRP, that's good (for the auction).

Edited June 18 by Will_K

[Will_K]

On 6/18/2024 at 2:59 AM, Nexus said:

But let's say it flopped and sold for $100. At this point, that would also have had zero impact.

Was hanging out a lot with my buddy Steve Mannion.  But he is not the artist I'm referencing below. 

Was at an artist's table the day after the auction.  He's a professional artist and not even close to being well known.  He was glad his auction piece sold for more than he was selling similar pieces.  He was thinking that buyers for those similar pieces would feel happy about their purchases.  And also that they would not feel bad about their purchases if the auction piece went for less.  But he was also not raising his prices because of the auction result.

Edited June 18 by Will_K

[Bronty]

On 6/16/2024 at 9:38 PM, Michael Browning said:

You know what, I won't ever be a dealer, so I'm not sure what I'd do. I rarely sell or trade away anything nowadays, so that is hard to answer.

That’s a fair answer, but it does show that your POV (and word choices!) are buyer-centric.    I know sellers can be annoying, trust me.   But believe me when I say that buyers can be every bit as annoying.    
 

At the end of the day, to bring it back to the discussion of scribbles and roughs for that $300 price point, what would you do if you had a booth at a con, and somebody walked up to you and said “I have $300 and I like artist X… what work of theirs can you sell me ?”    Would you offer the rough, or tell them they can’t afford to participate in the market for that artist?   
 

Point being…. “Dealers” are just people like you  and I, for the most part.     They don’t hatch nefarious plans (for the most part) or stay up late at night thinking about ploys to steal $300 (for the most part).    They aren’t really any better or worse than the people across the table. 

Edited June 18 by Bronty

[Kevn]

On 6/14/2024 at 7:30 PM, Gary Strange said:

There’s art dealers out there (specifically in a YouTube video about the OA Art Expo) asking $200-$500 for scribbles and roughs. I can’t get over that. Are we at that point that JRJrs pen doodles on a napkin is going to fetch a buyer at those price points?

I remember seeing the Frazetta booth at SDCC in either the 80s or early 90s with literal scribbles going for hundreds of dollars, and anything approaching a proper rough quite a bit higher. In '91 I paid $200 for a Kaluta pencil rough (for comparison, the next day I bought a Romita Sr. S-M splash page for less). I've paid good money for scribbles and roughs from Steve Rude, Jean Giraud, Bill Tytla, and a few others, and been happy for the opportunity. Maybe it's because I've been a traditional animator, where the roughs are far more interesting (and among professionals considered far more valuable) than the cleaned-up drawings or painted cels. The scribbles and roughs are often where the real artistry and creativity are on full display.

One thing that's easy to lose sight of - the fact that there is a robust market for new original art, including scribbles and roughs done on actual paper using physical media, is a major reason that so many talented artists in comics today continue working with traditional materials, including some who are young enough to have learned to work digitally from their earliest days. In animation the vast majority of character designers, viz dev artists, bg artists, story board artists, and animator work entirely digitally, even for two-dimensional animation projects. Future animation art collectors are going to have nothing but digital art to collect from the films and shows they're growing up with now, with few exceptions. Why? Because it's faster and easier and the artists have nothing to gain from working traditionally, since the studio owns all the actual art, and in most cases that physical art (if it exists) has minimal market value.

I applaud any dealer providing affordable art to fans and collectors. And I applaud the artists who resist the siren song of the Cintiq. I'm happy to put a little money into their grubby ink-stained hands.

[jjonahjameson11]

On 6/18/2024 at 8:21 AM, Bronty said:

That’s a fair answer, but it does show that your POV (and word choices!) are buyer-centric.    I know sellers can be annoying, trust me.   But believe me when I say that buyers can be every bit as annoying.    
 

At the end of the day, to bring it back to the discussion of scribbles and roughs for that $300 price point, what would you do if you had a booth at a con, and somebody walked up to you and said “I have $300 and I like artist X… what work of theirs can you sell me ?”    Would you offer the rough, or tell them they can’t afford to participate in the market for that artist?   
 

Point being…. “Dealers” are just people like you  and I, for the most part.     They don’t hatch nefarious plans (for the most part) or stay up late at night thinking about ploys to steal $300 (for the most part).    They aren’t really any better or worse than the people across the table. 

Oh, the stories I could tell to the contrary...

[vodou]

On 6/18/2024 at 8:21 AM, Bronty said:

. “Dealers” are just people...

Really? Are they really?  

[Xatari]

…

Edited June 18 by Xatari
Deleted

[Bronty]

On 6/18/2024 at 11:28 AM, jjonahjameson11 said:

Oh, the stories I could tell to the contrary...

And dealers have endless stories about azzhole buyers.... it ain't a one way street.

[Bronty]

On 6/18/2024 at 11:57 AM, vodou said:

Really? Are they really?  

[cloud cloddie]

On 6/17/2024 at 10:12 PM, tth2 said:

Isn't it good that the pieces are going for a lot if the proceeds are going to charity?

 

On 6/18/2024 at 2:27 AM, Twanj said:

Every charity auction I've ever heard of has gone nuts, to the point that if it's something I want I don't even bother bidding. There's no point! It's awesome they raise a bunch for causes and I have no reason to show off and overpay.

To be clear, the pieces in the Heroes Con auction benefit the Heroes Con, not the Hero Initiative or any other charity. A few pieces throughout the auction will have a charity designation requested by the artists, but 95% + of the auction proceeds go back to Heroes Con for operating costs. This is not a judgement - Heroes is a great show. From my understanding, there is a reason they get so many great artists every year, and would be too far in the red to sustain without the auction proceeds. 

[Xatari]

On 6/17/2024 at 11:59 PM, Nexus said:

Sigh. I had a feeling there would be a conspiracy theory around this. Not surprised at all, though, that it's coming from Xatari.

For those who don't know: I was at Heroescon this past weekend with a few artists. Including Daniel Warren Johnson. Dan did a live painting demo on Saturday, and donated the piece to the auction taking place that night. All proceeds to benefit the show.

Before the auction, we all went out to dinner. While we were waiting to be served, I posted a pic of the art to socials to help promote the auction:

https://www.instagram.com/p/C8QP1PyPZRI/

Albert Moy saw my post and texted our mutual friend Lambert to bid on his behalf. At no point before, during, or after the auction did I talk/text with Albert. For that matter, at no point before or during the auction did I reach out to any potential bidders. My preference for any sale, public or private, is to let things play out organically. Which they did here.

Albert ended up winning the piece at auction for $11K. All his communication with Lambert was via text, and that would back up everything here. Everything having to do with his bidding was between him and Lambert. I wasn't even with Lambert during the bidding. I had sought out Dan and we watched it all go down in the back of the room. Neither one of us was expecting this number. I consider myself Dan's longest fan/collector/champion, and *I* wouldn't pay that number.

Does this sale help Dan's market? I suppose it doesn't hurt, but not really otherwise. His art values are fairly well established already. But let's say it flopped and sold for $100. At this point, that would also have had zero impact. I guarantee you the next art drop for Dan will be just fine, regardless of how one piece did at a show auction. High or low.

As it turned out, Albert's max bid was a LOT HIGHER than $11K. If I cared, then this should have been juiced to an even more ridiculous number. All the underbidders were in the room. Ask any of them if I approached them to talk about this piece or this auction before or during the bidding. They all bid what they wanted to bid with no influence from me.

I've been selling art on behalf artists for 10+ years now. We've gotten where we are with no games or shenanigans. I'm happy to let the market decide. When pieces come back up for sale/auction, I don't bid to "protect values". I don't ask anyone to do that on my behalf, either. I try to keep tabs on resale values, but my chief concern is keeping interest high in the artists and their art. Everything else will take care of itself.

I was a collector long before I became a rep. My posting history here goes back nearly 20 years. I've never been a fan of the speculators/gamblers/flippers who become interested in comic art for its "investment potential" above all else. That didn't change when I became a rep. Those who enter the hobby from speculating in rookie sports cards and apply that view to first appearance comic art, for example, are gamblers. They're not collectors. They might try to convince everyone else otherwise, but I'm not buying it. I'm not at all shocked that they have become my saltiest critics and detractors. My posting history will also show that I've never been shy about speaking up. Will continue to do so.

For any other “gamblers and non-collectors” here is Felix’s solicitation email from a while back (5/28/20), but kindly remember it is us Rookie sports card collectors who are creating this hype. 

“But what you may not know...this DPS isn't just a pretty piece of art. It's also a teaser for Ryan's followup to his smash blockbuster, ABSOLUTE CARNAGE. And the biggest news of all: It features not one, but TWO, major first appearances!!

First appearance of Virus.

First appearance of the future Venom.

Ryan and writer Donny Cates have big plans for both. We've previously sold the first appearances of new Marvel Universe mainstays Cosmic Ghost Rider and Knull. Virus and the new Venom feel as significant as those. And these two may end up even bigger.”

[Bronty]

On 6/18/2024 at 12:46 PM, Xatari said:

For any other “gamblers and non-collectors” here is Felix’s solicitation email from a while back (5/28/20), but kindly remember it is us Rookie sports card collectors who are creating this hype. 

“But what you may not know...this DPS isn't just a pretty piece of art. It's also a teaser for Ryan's followup to his smash blockbuster, ABSOLUTE CARNAGE. And the biggest news of all: It features not one, but TWO, major first appearances!!

First appearance of Virus.

First appearance of the future Venom.

Ryan and writer Donny Cates have big plans for both. We've previously sold the first appearances of new Marvel Universe mainstays Cosmic Ghost Rider and Knull. Virus and the new Venom feel as significant as those. And these two may end up even bigger.”

You have your issues with Felix and that's between the two of you.

For my part I have zero issue with that solicitation.   The buyer has a brain, yes?   The buyer can exercise judgement in how he or she spends his dollar, yes?     The parts at the end are statements of opinion, not fact.   

Just feels like you're trying really hard to show what a scoundrel Felix is when frankly the solicitation and his reputation don't support that.

Is it hyping up the buyer a bit - sure, its trying to show these characters could be significant.   So what?    Show me a longtime buyer or seller that hasn't pointed out some arguable virtue or arguable weakness of a piece ?   Even a statement like "looks great for the 9.0 grade" falls into that camp.

As long as its stated as opinion, well, its like an azzhole, everybody's got one.    Felix's azzhole isn't that special.      Errrr.... what...

Edited June 18 by Bronty

[Bronty]

deleted

Edited June 18 by Bronty