OA Investments BARELY meeting Inflation?

[Artemaria]

Yes, buy what you love.

 

This is the truth.

 

But what you love can change, and your art then becomes a commodity to be sold or traded to acquire what you love *now*.

 

And this is truthy truth!

 

Buy what you love "now." And "trade up."

 

People have changed wives on these grounds, so to apply it to OA is not much of a stretch . . . .

[WOXL]

I could see color guide art increasing in value considering how cheap pages are now and how they could one day be considered rare because almost all new comics use computer coloring. At one point OA was considered worthless and now look where it is. Or, colors could be viewed as a forgotten old technique and worth nothing... it's still fun to collect and you won't be out much.

 

-Bob

[Mighty Hal]

I love this discussion.

 

I'm absolutely interested in the marketplace value of OA and its fluctuations in value. While I embrace the "buy what you love" philosophy, I also embrace the "buy what you love and hope it goes up in value" philosophy as well.

 

The one time I bought a piece to flip -- it was a Jonboy Meyers piece that I thought was undervalued -- I ended up losing money.

 

As I was weeping tears of regret, I received a secret invitation to the Society of Unknown Comic Kings (Eastern Region). It was when I attended my first meeting that I was given the "rules" of OA investing.

 

Rule #1: Buy what you love. That way, when it goes down in value, you can always say, "I bought it because I love it. I don't care what it cost." (And this is true of my entire collection.)

 

Rule #2: Great Artist + Popular Character + Dynamic/Important Scene/Splash/Cover = profit. Solid long-term investment potential even if you've overpaid on the initial investment.

 

Rule #3: Popular Artist does NOT equal Great Artist. Purchase carefully. Short-term investment potential only.

 

The Society even provided me with a list of Great Artists: Jack Kirby. Neal Adams. Michael Kaluta. Jeff Jones. James Steranko. Dave Stevens. George Perez. John Byrne. Brian Bolland. Adam Hughes. Alex Ross. Potentials: Frank Miller, Mike Mignolia, Bryan Hitch, Jim Lee.

 

While I don't own a single piece of comic art by any of these artists, I can recognize the wisdom in the words of the Society Elders. If I had the money to invest...buying for profit, not for love...I'd look for something special by one of those guys.

[BILL-O-migration]

I love this discussion.

 

I'm absolutely interested in the marketplace value of OA and its fluctuations in value. While I embrace the "buy what you love" philosophy, I also embrace the "buy what you love and hope it goes up in value" philosophy as well.

 

The one time I bought a piece to flip -- it was a Jonboy Meyers piece that I thought was undervalued -- I ended up losing money.

 

As I was weeping tears of regret, I received a secret invitation to the Society of Unknown Comic Kings (Eastern Region). It was when I attended my first meeting that I was given the "rules" of OA investing.

 

Rule #1: Buy what you love. That way, when it goes down in value, you can always say, "I bought it because I love it. I don't care what it cost." (And this is true of my entire collection.)

 

Rule #2: Great Artist + Popular Character + Dynamic/Important Scene/Splash/Cover = profit. Solid long-term investment potential even if you've overpaid on the initial investment.

 

Rule #3: Popular Artist does NOT equal Great Artist. Purchase carefully. Short-term investment potential only.

 

The Society even provided me with a list of Great Artists: Jack Kirby. Neal Adams. Michael Kaluta. Jeff Jones. James Steranko. Dave Stevens. George Perez. John Byrne. Brian Bolland. Adam Hughes. Alex Ross. Potentials: Frank Miller, Mike Mignolia, Bryan Hitch, Jim Lee.

 

While I don't own a single piece of comic art by any of these artists, I can recognize the wisdom in the words of the Society Elders. If I had the money to invest...buying for profit, not for love...I'd look for something special by one of those guys.

 

I love this discussion too and wonder why there is such aversion to the 'I' word? Why can't collecting & investing be complementary? I do not see the two ideas as mutually exclusive.

[tth2]

The Society even provided me with a list of Great Artists: Jack Kirby. Neal Adams. Michael Kaluta. Jeff Jones. James Steranko. Dave Stevens. George Perez. John Byrne. Brian Bolland. Adam Hughes. Alex Ross.

Whew, thank god they didn't include those hacks Frank Frazetta, Steve Ditko and Barry Smith.

[Guardian Comics]

John Romita Sr. is left off of that list as well...I hope it was an oversight or I am going to lose my shirt someday

 

Jim

[Artemaria]

As I was weeping tears of regret, I received a secret invitation to the Society of Unknown Comic Kings (Eastern Region). It was when I attended my first meeting that I was given the "rules" of OA investing.

 

The Society even provided me with a list of Great Artists: Jack Kirby. Neal Adams. Michael Kaluta. Jeff Jones. James Steranko. Dave Stevens. George Perez. John Byrne. Brian Bolland. Adam Hughes. Alex Ross. Potentials: Frank Miller, Mike Mignolia, Bryan Hitch, Jim Lee.

 

While I don't own a single piece of comic art by any of these artists, I can recognize the wisdom in the words of the Society Elders. If I had the money to invest...buying for profit, not for love...I'd look for something special by one of those guys.

 

I guess I have two questions.

 

1. The society is a joke right?

 

2. Are you saying you don't love work by any of the so-called Great Artists (or the suggested additions)?

 

Depending on the period, isn't it possible that (in addition to the suggestions in the prior posts) even more artists could be added to the list? Wally Wood; Gil Kane; Joe Kubert; Berni Wrightson; Gene Colan; Michael Golden; Jim Starlin; John Buscema; Arthur Adams. Potentials: Alex Ross; Walter Simonson (based on his great Thor run); David Finch, and Marshall Rogers (based exclusively on his seminal 1970s run on Detective).

 

Art is so subjective, does it really make any sense to tell people what to buy? A whole lot of people love James Jean and Steve McNiven, and I don't really care for them. I can't bring myself to look at their stuff even though the prices are high.

 

If the whole purpose is to look at it, doesn't it make sense to focus on what you like to look at and just try to be a little careful and not spend too much money?

[Kevin76]

The Society even provided me with a list of Great Artists: Jack Kirby. Neal Adams. Michael Kaluta. Jeff Jones. James Steranko. Dave Stevens. George Perez. John Byrne. Brian Bolland. Adam Hughes. Alex Ross.

Whew, thank god they didn't include those hacks Frank Frazetta, Steve Ditko and Barry Smith.

I really think he was just being general, posts like this people tend to take them at face value and say you didn't mention so and so and such and such...that's fanboy thinking right there.The point he's trying to make is that these artists you really can't go wrong with,just like Burne Hogarth,Hal Foster and Alex Raymond but just because he didn't mention those 3,doesn't mean he doesn't know what he's talking about. People over analize these types of posts which is why I don't make them.

[adamstrange]

1. The society is a joke right?

 

The acronym of the society is SUCKER

[invisibleghosts]

1. The society is a joke right?

 

The acronym of the society is SUCKER

 

I'm thinking of joining too.

 

I try and hold the opinion that even if my collection was worthless in dollar value it's art value would remain priceless...at least that's what I tell my wife!

[Artemaria]

1. The society is a joke right?

 

The acronym of the society is SUCKER

 

I guess I joined without knowing

[jjeanius]

For me, there is definitely an inverse relationship between buying what I love and buying what I consider to be a good investment...and this acts as a sliding scale of a sort. If I absolutely LOVE LOVE LOVE the art, I'm not quite as concerned about whether or not it's a good investment. If I'm lukewarm on the piece, the fact that it's a good investment can push me to purchase it...or the fact that it's a poor investment can convince me to let it go. There are also pieces that don't necessarily interest me personally, but they are simply too good of an investment opportunity to pass up.

 

If, for example, there is a piece that I like (but don't love) that is overpriced, or there is a piece that I'm not really a fan of but is clearly underpriced and a great investment...I'd lean towards buying the investment piece.

 

I think the most important thing is to have an idea of where the demand for a certain book/artist/etc is going. If you know the piece to be very desirable, and this shows no signs of changing, then you're probably going to be fine if you overpay a bit on it. If not, your next opportunity to purchase such a piece might very well be farther down the road when prices are even higher.

 

When it comes to your own collection, I think buying what you love is certainly the most important thing...though I think it's ill-advised to not also consider the investment potential of the piece. Unless you are independently wealthy, there is a good chance that you are spending money that you might need later on in life...so it's good to know that you can always get your money back out of a piece if need be. Sure, there are no guarantees...but knowing the market can go a long way towards hedging your bets.

[Artemaria]

Court -

 

I think you make many great points.

 

However, if someone really likes something, it is not always possible to guarantee that they will be able to always get their money out of every individual piece.

 

If you buy what you like and it makes you happy to look at it that is the purpose of art, so you will get your "utility" out of the piece as it will serve the purpose for which it was obtained -- which is to make you feel better through a pleasing aesthetic.

 

Moreover, if you like it, there are bound to be other people who like it as well. I think that how many other people like the same things that you do will determine that piece's monetary value at a given point in time. But it is very difficult to predict other people's tastes.

 

So, in the long run, I think an individual's OA collection will follow all other trends in life. Some will go up. Some will go down. Some will stay the same.

 

Please don't misunderstand me to say that I disagree with what you are saying, I just wonder whether for collectors like myself who are here to enjoy the art, if it takes away from the enjoyment of the hobby by constantly thinking that I hope I can get my $300 out of this page seven years from now.

 

Please give my best regards to Mr. Benes. His transformation into an elite artist has been a true pleasure to behold.

 

Best regards.

 

- A

[Thomas]

I buy what I like to own and enjoy every single piece in my collection. Do I hope it increases in value over time, sure. I know I can't take it to the grave with me so I hope to liquidate my collection 25 or so years down the road except for a few pieces. In that time I would hope to have them increase in value. If they don't then oh well. If they do, then great. More money to spend when I'm old.

[Kevin76]

No one spends $20K on a piece and says "If it doesn't rise in value, oh well"..

[jjeanius]

Hi Artemeria,

 

I think it really depends on price...and what that money means to the person spending it. Personally, I'm not too worried about whether or not a $300 page rises in value. I never like to take a loss, but if I am forced to sell it, there isn't really much to lose. I cannot say the same, however, for a piece that might cost $5000. If I'm going to buy a piece at that price level, I better be pretty confident I can get my money out of it if I have to. I can do a lot with that kind of money...and there is a lot of beautiful art (or prints) that can be hung on the walls without breaking the bank!

 

Court

[Artemaria]

Court-

 

When you continue to make excellent points like this, I will continue to agree with you.

 

I guess I haven't worried about the $5000 pieces because I don't have any.

 

Best regards.

 

- A

[delekkerste]

No one spends $20K on a piece and says "If it doesn't rise in value, oh well"..

 

I wouldn't necessarily agree with that statement. I've spent a significant sum assembling my collection the past 5 years, including a fair number of 5-figure pieces, and investment potential has never figured into the equation. When I buy a piece, of course I want to pay a reasonable price (obviously I don't want to pay more than I have to), but what the value of the piece does post-purchase doesn't concern me that much if I am buying a piece for my own enjoyment (and, almost all of the pieces I buy fall into that category). Sure, if the value of my collection fell by 50%, I wouldn't be jumping up and down for joy, but neither would I be selling off pieces trying to recoup my money; I'd just continue to own and enjoy my collection.

 

If I buy a piece of comic art, I've already made the decision to buy something that pays no interest, dividends and that generates no cash flow. Comic OA is a niche hobby with questionable long-term demographics and characteristics that do not position the hobby well to participating in the global boom we are currently experiencing (see my post in the GS X-Men #1 page thread). So, why should I (or anyone else) be surprised if OA doesn't hold its value over time? The fact that the market has done well in the past is irrelevant to me (mean reversion, anyone???)

 

Buy what you like and only what you can really afford...it's the only way to stay sane in this hobby.

[Kevin76]

No one spends $20K on a piece and says "If it doesn't rise in value, oh well"..

 

I wouldn't necessarily agree with that statement. I've spent a significant sum assembling my collection the past 5 years, including a fair number of 5-figure pieces, and investment potential has never figured into the equation. When I buy a piece, of course I want to pay a reasonable price (obviously I don't want to pay more than I have to), but what the value of the piece does post-purchase doesn't concern me that much if I am buying a piece for my own enjoyment (and, almost all of the pieces I buy fall into that category). Sure, if the value of my collection fell by 50%, I wouldn't be jumping up and down for joy, but neither would I be selling off pieces trying to recoup my money; I'd just continue to own and enjoy my collection.

 

If I buy a piece of comic art, I've already made the decision to buy something that pays no interest, dividends and that generates no cash flow. Comic OA is a niche hobby with questionable long-term demographics and characteristics that do not position the hobby well to participating in the global boom we are currently experiencing (see my post in the GS X-Men #1 page thread). So, why should I (or anyone else) be surprised if OA doesn't hold its value over time? The fact that the market has done well in the past is irrelevant to me (mean reversion, anyone???)

 

Buy what you like and only what you can really afford...it's the only way to stay sane in this hobby.

Sorry Delek, not everyone has the insane amount of cash flow you have to not be wondering if thier OA will ever make a return on thier investment.I guess that's why CGC mailes you plaques for best poster.

[mrpunch0]

No one spends $20K on a piece and says "If it doesn't rise in value, oh well"..

 

I wouldn't necessarily agree with that statement. I've spent a significant sum assembling my collection the past 5 years, including a fair number of 5-figure pieces, and investment potential has never figured into the equation. When I buy a piece, of course I want to pay a reasonable price (obviously I don't want to pay more than I have to), but what the value of the piece does post-purchase doesn't concern me that much if I am buying a piece for my own enjoyment (and, almost all of the pieces I buy fall into that category). Sure, if the value of my collection fell by 50%, I wouldn't be jumping up and down for joy, but neither would I be selling off pieces trying to recoup my money; I'd just continue to own and enjoy my collection.

 

If I buy a piece of comic art, I've already made the decision to buy something that pays no interest, dividends and that generates no cash flow. Comic OA is a niche hobby with questionable long-term demographics and characteristics that do not position the hobby well to participating in the global boom we are currently experiencing (see my post in the GS X-Men #1 page thread). So, why should I (or anyone else) be surprised if OA doesn't hold its value over time? The fact that the market has done well in the past is irrelevant to me (mean reversion, anyone???)

 

Buy what you like and only what you can really afford...it's the only way to stay sane in this hobby.

Sorry Delek, not everyone has the insane amount of cash flow you have to not be wondering if thier OA will ever make a return on thier investment.

 

I can't agree on the 20K - because I don't have 20K to spend on art anyway – but on a smaller scale I totally agree with D. I buy what I like and want to hold on to. I try not to overpay for anything. I'm not worried about the money I've spent. I'm not buying to flip – so I'm not worried if my 1K piece is suddenly only going to sell for $800.

 

Cause chances are – I'm not looking to sell it anyway. (The only time I sell art is to come up with some quick cash to buy other art. Or if I have something that someone else really, really wants.)