• 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.

FANTASY 15....................how likely is it that

Started by drdonaldblake,

136 posts in this topic

FFB

FFB

Posted
Posted
I dont want to get in a whos right whos wrong war here but I believe 99 percent of anyone with comic knowledge would agree that the OA to ASM 43 is not worth 106,000

 

Irrelevant. 99.999999999% of comic collectors could not afford that cover at $106K, so their opinions on the matter are inconsequetial. You might as well ask the abominable snowman whether a Ferrari is worth $250,000.

 

If two or more buyers bid the piece up to $106K, then that's (at least) what the piece was worth at that time. A gaggle of onlookers who don't participate in that section of the market don't get to dictate what big ticket items are worth.

 

 

Thats the daftest piece of reasoning I've ever heard. screwy.gif

So what you are saying is that anyone who is not financially on a par with anyone else, has an invalid opinion.

You've just killed the American Dream in one sentence. 27_laughing.gif

 

No, SFB, what I'm saying is that value is dictated by those in a position to buy a thing and the willingness to do so. Those who are not in a position to buy something or are unwilling to do so are not valid indicators of an item's value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Royale-migration

Royale-migration

Posted
Posted
I dont want to get in a whos right whos wrong war here but I believe 99 percent of anyone with comic knowledge would agree that the OA to ASM 43 is not worth 106,000

 

Irrelevant. 99.999999999% of comic collectors could not afford that cover at $106K, so their opinions on the matter are inconsequetial. You might as well ask the abominable snowman whether a Ferrari is worth $250,000.

 

If two or more buyers bid the piece up to $106K, then that's (at least) what the piece was worth at that time. A gaggle of onlookers who don't participate in that section of the market don't get to dictate what big ticket items are worth.

 

 

Thats the daftest piece of reasoning I've ever heard. screwy.gif

So what you are saying is that anyone who is not financially on a par with anyone else, has an invalid opinion.

You've just killed the American Dream in one sentence. 27_laughing.gif

 

I think FFB's point was a play on Mutantkeys argument that 99% of comic collectors wouldnt find the piece worth 106K. You dont look to people who have no interest in someehing as having any relevant info. on the subject at hand, as they have no interest.

 

I think the sale was a water-shed mark for the recognition that some of this stuff is very valued by comic art collectors and I find it a good think that anything associated with the genre I love has capital flowing in its direction. It bodes well for comics to become recognized as having a place amongst the shi-shi.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alex DeLarge-migration

Alex DeLarge-migration

Posted
Posted
I dont want to get in a whos right whos wrong war here but I believe 99 percent of anyone with comic knowledge would agree that the OA to ASM 43 is not worth 106,000

 

Irrelevant. 99.999999999% of comic collectors could not afford that cover at $106K, so their opinions on the matter are inconsequetial. You might as well ask the abominable snowman whether a Ferrari is worth $250,000.

 

If two or more buyers bid the piece up to $106K, then that's (at least) what the piece was worth at that time. A gaggle of onlookers who don't participate in that section of the market don't get to dictate what big ticket items are worth.

 

 

Thats the daftest piece of reasoning I've ever heard. screwy.gif

So what you are saying is that anyone who is not financially on a par with anyone else, has an invalid opinion.

You've just killed the American Dream in one sentence. 27_laughing.gif

 

No, SFB , what I'm saying is that value is dictated by those in a position to buy a thing and the willingness to do so. Those who are not in a position to buy something or are unwilling to do so are not valid indicators of an item's value.

 

Why do you constantly resort to name calling?

For a so called lawyer your erudition is very poor, and your standing as an elected committee member on these boards needs to be called into question.

This is twice now you have referred to me as s h i t for brains, a remark I take exception to, and very much look forward to asking you to repeat it to my face, at any upcoming function I am able to attend. thumbsup2.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
comicdonna

comicdonna

Posted
Posted
I dont want to get in a whos right whos wrong war here but I believe 99 percent of anyone with comic knowledge would agree that the OA to ASM 43 is not worth 106,000

 

Irrelevant. 99.999999999% of comic collectors could not afford that cover at $106K, so their opinions on the matter are inconsequetial. You might as well ask the abominable snowman whether a Ferrari is worth $250,000.

 

If two or more buyers bid the piece up to $106K, then that's (at least) what the piece was worth at that time. A gaggle of onlookers who don't participate in that section of the market don't get to dictate what big ticket items are worth.

 

 

Thats the daftest piece of reasoning I've ever heard. screwy.gif

So what you are saying is that anyone who is not financially on a par with anyone else, has an invalid opinion.

You've just killed the American Dream in one sentence. 27_laughing.gif

 

No, SFB , what I'm saying is that value is dictated by those in a position to buy a thing and the willingness to do so. Those who are not in a position to buy something or are unwilling to do so are not valid indicators of an item's value.

 

Why do you constantly resort to name calling?

For a so called lawyer your erudition is very poor, and your standing as an elected committee member on these boards needs to be called into question.

This is twice now you have referred to me as s h i t for brains, a remark I take exception to, and very much look forward to asking you to repeat it to my face, at any upcoming function I am able to attend. thumbsup2.gif

893whatthe.gifpopcorn.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FFB

FFB

Posted
Posted
I dont want to get in a whos right whos wrong war here but I believe 99 percent of anyone with comic knowledge would agree that the OA to ASM 43 is not worth 106,000

 

Irrelevant. 99.999999999% of comic collectors could not afford that cover at $106K, so their opinions on the matter are inconsequetial. You might as well ask the abominable snowman whether a Ferrari is worth $250,000.

 

If two or more buyers bid the piece up to $106K, then that's (at least) what the piece was worth at that time. A gaggle of onlookers who don't participate in that section of the market don't get to dictate what big ticket items are worth.

 

 

Thats the daftest piece of reasoning I've ever heard. screwy.gif

So what you are saying is that anyone who is not financially on a par with anyone else, has an invalid opinion.

You've just killed the American Dream in one sentence. 27_laughing.gif

 

No, SFB , what I'm saying is that value is dictated by those in a position to buy a thing and the willingness to do so. Those who are not in a position to buy something or are unwilling to do so are not valid indicators of an item's value.

 

Why do you constantly resort to name calling?

For a so called lawyer your erudition is very poor, and your standing as an elected committee member on these boards needs to be called into question.

This is twice now you have referred to me as s h i t for brains, a remark I take exception to, and very much look forward to asking you to repeat it to my face, at any upcoming function I am able to attend. thumbsup2.gif

 

I guess you referring to my post as the "daftest piece of reasoning" is your idea of erudite and polite commentary? And my position as a board member means that I have to take a comment like that from you without saying something? I don't think so.

 

Feel free to attend WonderCon or Chicago and I'll be happy to say the same to your face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alex DeLarge-migration

Alex DeLarge-migration

Posted
Posted
I dont want to get in a whos right whos wrong war here but I believe 99 percent of anyone with comic knowledge would agree that the OA to ASM 43 is not worth 106,000

 

Irrelevant. 99.999999999% of comic collectors could not afford that cover at $106K, so their opinions on the matter are inconsequetial. You might as well ask the abominable snowman whether a Ferrari is worth $250,000.

 

If two or more buyers bid the piece up to $106K, then that's (at least) what the piece was worth at that time. A gaggle of onlookers who don't participate in that section of the market don't get to dictate what big ticket items are worth.

 

 

Thats the daftest piece of reasoning I've ever heard. screwy.gif

So what you are saying is that anyone who is not financially on a par with anyone else, has an invalid opinion.

You've just killed the American Dream in one sentence. 27_laughing.gif

 

No, SFB , what I'm saying is that value is dictated by those in a position to buy a thing and the willingness to do so. Those who are not in a position to buy something or are unwilling to do so are not valid indicators of an item's value.

 

Why do you constantly resort to name calling?

For a so called lawyer your erudition is very poor, and your standing as an elected committee member on these boards needs to be called into question.

This is twice now you have referred to me as s h i t for brains, a remark I take exception to, and very much look forward to asking you to repeat it to my face, at any upcoming function I am able to attend. thumbsup2.gif

 

I guess you referring to my post as the " daftest piece of reasoning " is your idea of erudite and polite commentary? And my position as a board member means that I have to take a comment like that from you without saying something? I don't think so.

 

Feel free to attend WonderCon or Chicago and I'll be happy to say the same to your face.

 

That is not a personal offensive remark, merely a comment on your usual inane meanderings.

The lights are on and clearly nobody is home.

Just FYI, repeating that remark to my face is not a good idea...for you 893applaud-thumb.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MutantKeys

MutantKeys

Posted
Posted
I dont want to get in a whos right whos wrong war here but I believe 99 percent of anyone with comic knowledge would agree that the OA to ASM 43 is not worth 106,000

 

Irrelevant. 99.999999999% of comic collectors could not afford that cover at $106K, so their opinions on the matter are inconsequetial. You might as well ask the abominable snowman whether a Ferrari is worth $250,000.

 

If two or more buyers bid the piece up to $106K, then that's (at least) what the piece was worth at that time.

You make a good point, so in your opinion do you think a "non-key" cover to asm which in this case is 43 is worth 106K

 

popcorn.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DeeDee-migration

DeeDee-migration

Posted
Posted
I dont want to get in a whos right whos wrong war here but I believe 99 percent of anyone with comic knowledge would agree that the OA to ASM 43 is not worth 106,000

 

Irrelevant. 99.999999999% of comic collectors could not afford that cover at $106K, so their opinions on the matter are inconsequetial. You might as well ask the abominable snowman whether a Ferrari is worth $250,000.

 

If two or more buyers bid the piece up to $106K, then that's (at least) what the piece was worth at that time. A gaggle of onlookers who don't participate in that section of the market don't get to dictate what big ticket items are worth.

 

 

Thats the daftest piece of reasoning I've ever heard. screwy.gif

So what you are saying is that anyone who is not financially on a par with anyone else, has an invalid opinion.

You've just killed the American Dream in one sentence. 27_laughing.gif

 

 

No, SFB , what I'm saying is that value is dictated by those in a position to buy a thing and the willingness to do so. Those who are not in a position to buy something or are unwilling to do so are not valid indicators of an item's value.

 

Why do you constantly resort to name calling?

For a so called lawyer your erudition is very poor, and your standing as an elected committee member on these boards needs to be called into question.

This is twice now you have referred to me as s h i t for brains, a remark I take exception to, and very much look forward to asking you to repeat it to my face, at any upcoming function I am able to attend. thumbsup2.gif

 

I guess you referring to my post as the "daftest piece of reasoning" is your idea of erudite and polite commentary? And my position as a board member means that I have to take a comment like that from you without saying something? I don't think so.

 

Feel free to attend WonderCon or Chicago and I'll be happy to say the same to your face.

 

 

I don't mean to intrude here, but is all this really necessary? Going on a childish exchange like this just makes you both look like a couple of prima donnas and drama queens. Why not just respectfully agree to disagree and move on?

 

foreheadslap.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing