DAM60's Overstreet Comments on the Market Reports

[whetteon]

All good thoughts. My question is that if Comic Books are mass produced and basically worthless, why chase after Wine, Coin and Cars? In fact I can see no difference between a rare '5 known to exsist car' versus a comic like Action Comics 1.

 

Personally, I fell that comics has been labeled by the masses as something only geeky people would be interested in. Until more 'uber' rich owners start having parties around recently aquired Detective 27's, this hobby will never loose its '36 year old fat kid in the basement' sterotype that seems to plague us.

 

Bottom line, you think of comics you think of the comic book guy in the Simpsons, you think of wine collector and suddenly the person is a world class man of mystery.

[tth2]

In any case, I would be more apt to be *selling* and cashing out the outsized gains of the past few years than buying these days, staying liquid until things get cheap again.

You can short stocks in your portfolio too.

[tth2]

Of course Gene'll beat the GPA average if we're only talking slabs. All the profit is already built into the slab price.

Apparently, he doesn't have the same confidence that you have that slab prices have peaked.

[FlyingDonut]

I'd do it, but not on slabs. The big gains aren't going to be in slabbed books anyways.

Too many variables, particularly in grading. And how would prices be verified?

 

I'd have to flip books all year, but I could do it.

[delekkerste]

Of course Gene'll beat the GPA average if we're only talking slabs. All the profit is already built into the slab price.

Apparently, he doesn't have the same confidence that you have that slab prices have peaked.

 

No, it's more that I think that other asset classes are overdue for a correction after what has been a rally for the ages. Slab prices? As far as I can tell, the breadth in the market has gotten narrower and narrower, with fewer and fewer books hitting new highs - looking at those GPAnalysis graphs, it looks like many of the popular high-grade Bronze books peaked in the third quarter of 2004. I'll wager that the "average" CGC book peaked somewhere between the end of 2002 and the end of 2004. Not that people are advocating investing in "average" CGC books, but then again, not everyone can pick the "above average" winners, now, can they? I wouldn't want to run a 1-year forward comparison of stocks or commodities vs. comics, because, among other reasons, the former have been registering triple-digit gains and could easily correct 15-20% while comic prices may be flattish due to the stickiness of this comparatively less liquid market over a 1-year horizon.

 

You know, in the bigger scheme of things, though, it's not even about comics vs. other asset classes, it's about buying when things are cheap and selling when things are dear, and I don't buy the argument that value can only be known in hindsight. I think most people know intuitively that we are nowhere close to being on the 2nd floor of The Great Rally (TGR, as opposed to TGC ).

[Aman619]

Gene, pick ANY investment and lets get this party started. dude! Stocks bonds, Tbills, --- heck, short th emarket or a stock or two is you want. All Bob wants you to do is make a portfolio and compare it to a comics portfolio. If you are selling and moving your own money to cash, then choose that! It sounds to me that Bob just wants an expert like you to pick a portfolio for him to compare HIS comics portfolio against.

 

Frankly, even with our little disputes in the past, Im sure you can choose from ANY and ALL investment classes worldwide and beat the 3 - 10% or whatever comics will yield in the next year. no?? Id ask my investment guys, but they only mirror the market.... they have very little special insight into market movements....

[tth2]

Of course Gene'll beat the GPA average if we're only talking slabs. All the profit is already built into the slab price.

Apparently, he doesn't have the same confidence that you have that slab prices have peaked.

 

No, it's more that I think that other asset classes are overdue for a correction after what has been a rally for the ages. Slab prices? As far as I can tell, the breadth in the market has gotten narrower and narrower, with fewer and fewer books hitting new highs - looking at those GPAnalysis graphs, it looks like many of the popular high-grade Bronze books peaked in the third quarter of 2004. I'll wager that the "average" CGC book peaked somewhere between the end of 2002 and the end of 2004. Not that people are advocating investing in "average" CGC books, but then again, not everyone can pick the "above average" winners, now, can they? I wouldn't want to run a 1-year forward comparison of stocks or commodities vs. comics, because, among other reasons, the former have been registering triple-digit gains and could easily correct 15-20% while comic prices may be flattish due to the stickiness of this comparatively less liquid market over a 1-year horizon.

I'll depart from Bob's parameters and say you don't have to pick a balanced portfolio, and size of the portfolio could be small so that the comic portfolio could be made up of small ticket books. I'd mostly be interested in the percentage gain, not absolute dollars, anyways.

 

Also, you can make it as concentrated/undiversified as you want. If you think some assets or stocks are due for a correction, you could put them in as a short position. For that matter, you could just put the entire portfolio into 1-year treasuries, which means you're guaranteed to get your principal plus interest back in 1 year's time (unless your Road Warrior scenario plays out ), if you are so convinced that slab prices will at best stagnate and at worst continue their decline. You can even pick the 10 slabbed books too, but they have to be books that have recorded sales in a specified grade on GPA at least once per quarter, so that we'll be able to have a starting and closing price to use for measurement purposes.

 

You know, in the bigger scheme of things, it's not even about comics vs. other asset classes, it's buying when things are cheap and selling when things are dear. I don't buy the argument that value can only be known in hindsight - the psychological barrier constraining comic (and other) prices has long been broken and after establishing a normalized baseline period, we can compare comic prices vs. income levels (because in the long-run, the two are inextricably entwined) and see that comic prices are no longer cheap. Whether people thought they were expensive in 1980 or 1990 at the time is irrelevant - under this framework, they were screamingly cheap and now they are embarrassingly expensive.

This is something we'll continue to disagree about forever. Saying that a NM AF 15 represented 100% of an average salary in 1990 and 175% of an average salary in 2006 is irrelevant with respect to assessing mindset in 1990, because paying 100% of average salary for a comic in 1990 would have been as big a leap of faith as paying 175% in 2006. 100% of salary in 1990 only seems screamingly cheap because people are paying 175% of salary in 2006.

 

Suppose the sale of the WM AF 15 for $40K back in the early 1990s had represented a highwater mark for comics (which many at the time believed it did), and prices had plunged by 50% after that? Would you be saying today that the book was screamingly cheap back in 1990? Of course not, because hindsight would have showed that the book declined. You'd be laughing at the chump who blew his money on overvalued paper.

[jbud73]

All good thoughts. My question is that if Comic Books are mass produced and basically worthless, why chase after Wine, Coin and Cars? In fact I can see no difference between a rare '5 known to exsist car' versus a comic like Action Comics 1.

 

Personally, I fell that comics has been labeled by the masses as something only geeky people would be interested in. Until more 'uber' rich owners start having parties around recently aquired Detective 27's, this hobby will never loose its '36 year old fat kid in the basement' sterotype that seems to plague us.

 

Bottom line, you think of comics you think of the comic book guy in the Simpsons, you think of wine collector and suddenly the person is a world class man of mystery.

 

Well I think that your second point answered your first question. I also believe that's why all other disposable income items are grouped together after horses, art and what I would call antiquities. If you ascribe to the theory that most big ticket disposable income items are about STATUS - then I would have to argue that traditionally comics have and will continue to score very LOW on this scale, at least after age 13.

 

Maybe its not so much that they have been stigmatized as it is that they have not been glorified. Now what about the movie arguement? Well I think for the Main run heros the connection might be made to comics. How about movies like Constantine and Sin City, Blade and V for Vendetta? Somehow I think those films are loosly associated with comics if at all. And if Spiderman and X-Men are thought of as cool, I can bet you its a childhood memory kinda cool, rather than an adult kind of cool.

 

You must also remember that comics are in a large respect in competition for disposable income dollars. Somehow I think they are losing this war, even at the "geek" level to video games and have been doing so for a long time. At the Adult Status level, well lets just say that the big three items I mentioned along with pursuits such as Wine and Cars are huge barriers to the entry of comics to Adult STATUS.

 

Remember Bruce Wayne was portrayed as a playboy, jet set, elite, upper echelon figure. What did he spend his money on to cement this image? Cars, art, artifacts etc - never remember his comic book collection getting any note, seems to me he didn't have one.

[the blob]

m, well, i think comparing 20th century comics to 20th century original art doesn't make much sense (although 16 million for a modern artist who pumped out a lot of work like lichtenstein seems absurd, he's not a van gogh or anything with a small body of work), but comparing them to 20th centruy first edition books does.

 

so, in that regard, batman 1, etc. are priced pretty favorably compared to many hemingway, etc. first editions. granted, i suspect there are more copies of most of the books out there, but there are probably more people willing to drop serious money on them too. in fact, the big big money on book firsts from the 20th century usually requires an autograph

[delekkerste]

Sorry guys, I'm going to be rational about this and recognize that, even ignoring the wholly unrealistic structure and potential problems with calculation, verification, manipulation, apples-to-oranges comparisons, etc., what is being proposed would do nothing to shed any light on the merits of comic books as an investment asset class. There is no upside for me in this endeavor and, suffice to say, I think that time will show what the merits were of investing in comics at the levels prevailing in recent years and we will not have needed to engage in a trumped up sideshow to see that.

[Aman619]

I agree with you. Very little upside for you since so many will be cheering for you to fail! But, I honestly dont see how you could lose. Im convinced yo understand the markets well enough to outperform the "comics market" whatever that means. Even I dont think comics will show a huge gain this coming year. But it would have been fun to try and define a comics portfolio to use to compare with, once and for all. Not easy, but an interesting proposition.

[tth2]

I also believe that's why all other disposable income items are grouped together after horses, art and what I would call antiquities.

Actually, the really big money is spent on boats and yachts. Playing in the America's Cup requires being a billionaire these days, and Paul Allen and others keep building bigger and bigger ships. Horse racing, unless you have a stable of Makhtoum or Magnier scale, can still be participated in by the "merely" wealthy.

 

Remember Bruce Wayne was portrayed as a playboy, jet set, elite, upper echelon figure. What did he spend his money on to cement this image? Cars, art, artifacts etc - never remember his comic book collection getting any note, seems to me he didn't have one.

Well, Richie Rich had a comic collection containing every comic ever made.

[the blob]

well mr. financial fancy pants, why isn't a comparison to pre-1950 20th century first edition books relevant? in all honesty, [expensive] comics might be expensive compared to some of the major firsts out there, with the possible exception of some of the uber rare limited edition signed firsts for some of the classics put out in the 20s and 30s that arguably have as much or more cultural impact than comics. I tossed my NY Times book review for the week, but Bauman's rare books usually runs an ad showing a few. http://www.baumanrarebooks.com/

 

$17,500 for a 1939 limited edition of 425 copy signed edition of Finnegan's Wake, $13,500 for a 1943 limited edition of 525 signed edition of the Little Prince...

 

Perhaps some of these are more expensive than similar comic counterparts.

 

slighltly dinged first edition of For Whom the Bell Tolls -- $2200 (not signed)

 

mind you, i understand that these are high end retail prices and better prices can probably be had at auction

[Timulty]

Whoa, those books are pulling that!!!! Yee Haw!!! I am going to retire now.

[jimjum12]

I've turned up a couple of nice collections of comics at rare book stores.Also found a Pogo daily from 1952 for $ 350 at one.I used to seek out old books about mysticism and books with N.C. Wyeth illustrations.Old book stores are cool.GOD BLESS...

 

-jimbo(a friend of jesus)

[blazingbob]

Gene:

I've read a large number of posts where I hear about your gains yet all I have is your word. Not that I want a printed statement but my experience with most investors is that they remember their winners and suffer memory loss on the losers. In fact based on the fact that you are a "former investment banker/trader/dealer" versus a "collector/investor" I'd say you have a big advantage over the guy reading tape and relying on investment advice from brokers/financial advisors.

 

Pick a portfolio, set a dollar amount to it. If it's a stock set a date where it's bought end of day, a mutual fund same thing, commidity etc. Have members pick their competing portfolio, same rules, GPA price that day. Have a 1/3/5/10 year horizon if somebody is that ambitious.

 

Simple measurements, simple percentage gain or loss. I don't care about inflation or how much the dollar has depreciated against my original deposit.

 

This doesn't have to be rocket science. Remember, you're the investment guy. With your experience you should kick our .

[buttock]

You could do this retrospectively and you wouldn't have to wait. Look at the last 2-3 years of some funds and some books and compare.

 

Instant results.

[blazingbob]

In hindsight I'm sure we have all made money or could have made money. Hell there are threads proclaiming what U COULD HAVE BOUGHT in 2000 and for how much.

 

This is different, it's very easy to go back and pick the top 10 performing books or top performing stocks. However, when it's in a thread with your name on it dated and unaltered it's set in stone and can be measured. If you picked FF #48 CGC 9.4 as one of your picks I don't think you made a lot of money last year. Or Giant Size X-Men #1 9.6 for that matter. But without it being in writing would anybody admit that they might have paid too much for one of these books last year? Or two years ago?

[Aman619]

heres an angle not mentioned. Which prices are we talking about? Suppose I bought JollyMan #1 last year for $8000. Later that year someone else buys a different copy for 8500. Then I sell mine to you, Bob, for 7500 cause the book is only "worth" 8500 and you need to make more than $500 on it.

 

so now we have three sales: 8000, 8500 and 7500. Even if you sell that copy for 8500, what will the "profit" be? GPA wont see the 7500. BUT - - to me, the investor, I LOST 500 while GPA will show a gain of 375. Gets confusing. Cause now we are factoring in fees. Comics have bigger fees than front-loaded Mutual Funds, so actual returns will vary from whatever the stats show.

[blazingbob]

Here's what I'm proposing

 

Let's say I pick Marvel spotlight #5 9.4 as part of my portfolio and the closeout date for picks is 4/15/2006.

 

I go to GPA and pick the last MS #5 9.4 sold, hypothetically $1500.

 

Thread will state that Portfolio #1 - Bronze Age picked by AMAN contains a MS #5 9.4 that cost him $1500.

 

Gene picks his stock or commidity. Let say he's bullish on Merck. Buys 500 shares at $3 a share hypothetical cost is $1500.

 

One year later we see how well you've done

MS #5 9.4 on GPA, last recorded sale is $1600

Aman you made $100 which is less than 7%.

 

Gene goes to online stock quote and Merck is at $4 which is approx 33%.

 

Gene wins, you lose.

 

Now this is a very simple scenario and quite frankly the hesitation would be the fact that it's in black and white. Everyone sells at the high point when they own stock, they don't hold on. Everybody quickly dumps their losers, yeah right. Of course the last GPA record sale of MS #5 9.4 could be a cream/offwhite copy. Of course you personally could have sold it and got more. Rationalize it all you want but the idea is to see what exactly I'm competing against versus the intellectualizaton investing model that somehow I'm not privy to.